Helpful Reminder!

It never gets old. Never.

Online Philanthropy Markets

Interesting post via PSD blog about a publication by Keystone: Online philanthropy markets: From 'Feel-Good' giving to effective social investing?.

The call for a reliable framework to guide social investment seems like a common challenge.

Review to follow...

Clinton Rules

OK, I will stop soon...but it will be hard for me.

This image worries me. I trusted in something different. Now I see inspired people beginning to dislike each other over the democratic primaries. Meanwhile, Bush and McCain head into the white house.



Two points today:

Obama is still winning and seems to have won Texas. Is this reflected in the headlines? What's going on?

Second, I don't like Clinton Rules, which are the general rules. I didn't like that 3 a.m. commercial and I don't like Canadian "leaked" memos affecting elections. I appreciate the Brooks column. I yearn deeply for something different. But I don't think he should hit her in the kneecap.

Is that Nancy Kerrigan reference? That really takes it back to the 90s.

Stop, Mr. Krugman!

Why don't you re-read your column on February 11. You told us that you would like to see moments with more "strong assurances from both Democratic candidates that they respect their opponents and would support them in the general election." You implied the supporters of each should do the same.

But today's column is all about scaring "progressive activists" with a handful of rhetorical questions that frame the likely nominee as all superficial personality and likely to lose to McCain's personality in the general election.

All in all, the Democrats are in a place few expected a year ago. The 2008 campaign, it seems, will be waged on the basis of personality, not political philosophy. If the magic works, all will be forgiven. But if it doesn't, the recriminations could tear the party apart.

No, that isn't what happened and it won't tear the party apart. We read your very pro-Clinton pieces and considered them very carefully. Thank you for your insight, as always. But this hasn't been all about personality - and I am tired of this being seen as a pejorative term - over political philosophy. It is about leadership, which I think is a lot more than just personality, and it seems a lot of people support Obama's leadership over Clinton's. Either one of them have the political points that can win in November.

You, like all of us, are welcome to make another plug for the policy issues you think are important, but stop implying that the progressive activists of Obama have been duped into supporting an articulate Bloomberg, as you did today.

Go Obama or Clinton. Let's just get it over with.

Obama!

I hate the politics of fear.

Senator Obama responds: "I will never see the threat of terrorism as a way to scare up votes, because it's a threat that should rally this country around our common enemies. That is the judgment we need at 3 a.m."

Worth thinking about again...from NPR

Building on that last post about Obama's positive message...check out this NPR story about a guy named Mark McKinnon, senior adviser to McCain and former adviser to W who helped defeat McCain in 2000. Listen to the end of the interview about how he'd be "uncomfortable" being McCain's adviser if its an Obama vs. McCain race. Not sure if it is praise for Obama, but points to what will likely be a different type of race if he is the democratic pick.

And, while cheeky, I love Daniel Schorr's imaginary letter from Senator McCain to W.

"The cynics can no longer say our hope is false."

I would like to remind anyone on the democratic side that Mr. Krugman is right about one thing - it is important that those supporting Clinton and Obama need to re-assure each other than they would support either candidate in the election.

Senator Clinton, I will support you if you are the democratic nominee.

But I really disagree with with Krugman's comment that "most of the venom" is coming from supporters of Obama. That comes from immature politics and it is gushing from immature supporters for all candidates. It makes me cringe to read the comments on the NYT website (and it makes me want to run and hide when I listen to Fox News). But it is exactly the rhetoric of Obama that most counteracts the venom of poisonous politics. Since when is the ability to speak, inspire and generate positive energy a weakness? It isn't a "cult of personality"; it definitely isn't a "platitude", Senator McCain; it is a rare, rare quality called leadership, finally.

I am inspired! (and well done Missouri...)

via Dowd column today...

"I think we should never be derisive about somebody who has the ability to inspire," Senator [Claire] McCaskill told David Gregory on MSNBC on Tuesday. "You know, we've had some dark days in this democracy over the last seven years, and today the sun is out. It is shining brightly. I watch these kids, these old and young, these black and white, 20,000 of them, pour into our dome in St. Louis Saturday night, and they feel good about being an American right now. And I think that's something that we have to capture."

Inspiration matters! It is scary to be inspired. I am inspired! Run, Obama, run!

On to Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, Washington and even the Virgin Islands!

"Malaria and How to Beat It"

The debate on giving away free malaria nets (and other health interventions) continues in The Economist. Now the WHO is backing the drive to kill the notion that paying a small amount makes a greater impact.

I am a bit confused in my own logic on this one. The Economist saying give it away, while I am intuitively feeling like "free is more effective" still ignores a few key points. Maybe the simple lesson is summed up best by hwig, a commenter on the article...

Giving out free nets is fine but it should be accompanied by a strong program of education otherwise they will be misused in exactly the way described at the beginning of the article.

Is that right?

Update March 24, 2008: A few more comments on the matter from the PSD blog, which has a link to the WRI post that has commentary on the issue.

Jenna Bush in 2049!

Very well put, Mr. Kristof!

Mrs. Clinton has proven herself an excellent senator, and presumably would make a superior president. Yet...28 years...two families! That needn’t be decisive, but it’s too important to be ignored.

Nobody loves Kazakhstan more than me, but...

But I got to say, Bill Clinton is trying to make me really dislike him.

Read: An Ex-President, a Mining Deal and a Big Donor.

Is Clinton doing it for the good of his foundation? For the good of Kazakhstan? Sorry, this sounds very, very fishy.

And what is with the timing of this story? I saw nothing related to current events and actually caught the story when it popped up on my Google mail news feed.

Tuesday is a HUGE day!

I can't recall being excited about a politician, until May. I was disappointed to read the NYT endorsement of Clinton, but was far from convinced.

Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton would both help restore America's global image, to which President Bush has done so much grievous harm. They are committed to changing America's role in the world, not just its image.
...
On the major issues, there is no real gulf separating the two.

It goes on to say how they are impressed with Clinton's experience and concludes that she's more qualified/best choice.

OK. That's one opinion, but no policy differences of note and generally an acceptance that "experience" wins the day.

I will let three people express the way I would respond...

Bryant Jones, a 25-year-old, white, normally Republican voter, quoted today in Roger Cohen's column:

I'm 25 and for my entire life a Bush or a Clinton has been in the executive office, either as vice-president or president. The United States is not about dynasties.

Not a usual for me, but William Kristol on today's op-ed page:

Right now, Hillary Clinton is ahead in the polls in almost all the big states voting. She is a tough and capable campaigner, and she may be able to hold on to those leads. But it is now clear that putting her in the White House brings a hyperactive Bill back in with her. Who needs it? Liberals and Democrats can get basically the same policies without the Clinton baggage, and in choosing Obama, they can nominate a more electable candidate.

Most importantly, Toni Morrison, as quoted from a letter printed in the NYT:

In addition to keen intelligence, integrity and a rare authenticity, you exhibit something that has nothing to do with age, experience, race or gender and something I don't see in other candidates. That something is a creative imagination which coupled with brilliance equals wisdom. It is too bad if we associate it only with gray hair and old age. Or if we call searing vision naivete. Or if we believe cunning is insight. Or if we settle for finessing cures tailored for each ravaged tree in the forest while ignoring the poisonous landscape that feeds and surrounds it.

Wisdom is a gift; you can't train for it, inherit it, learn it in a class, or earn it in the workplace -- that access can foster the acquisition of knowledge, but not wisdom.

And I was not convinced by Mr. Krugman comparing Obama to Clinton in 1992. Huge difference.

I'm daring to be excited!

Not Enough Innocents Abroad

Last week's opinion on Peace Corps, Too Many Innocents Abroad brings up some old questions about the value of the organization.

I don't think that the article was as anti-Peace Corps as many responses I read seemed to imply. It was asking for some self-evaluation, which can't be bad.

Peace Corps isn't a development organization (and shouldn't be compared to one). What kind of organization it is...up for debate. I love it and sometimes hate it (for many of the reasons mentioned in the article). But I think its best strength is as cultural exchange organization. (Well covered in the letters that followed and the response from Senator Chris Dodd.) It will keep getting support because a lot of people, especially me, know that this is valuable. Impossilbe to measure, but also impossible to deny for anyone who had gone through it. I was so humbled by what I learned about being an "outsider" from my two years in Russia as a volunteer. It was invaluable for me, even though there are a lot of things I might want to change about the old PC. I considered leaving after a year and would have, but really thought the people I worked with valued my contribution.

As a policy suggestion, rather than just recruit more older PCVs, we need Peace Corps in Saudi Arabia, Iran and Pakistan, if we could convince those governments of the value of exchange and solicit the invitations needed. Nothing would be better for "peace" than dumping some snot-nosed 25-year-olds (like I was) into a really odd situation. It would be tough to find valuable, semi-structured, sites, but I am sure there is something Americans could be good for in these well-educated countries. I still maintain that cultural exchange and cooperation on "soft" issues like the environment was key to thawing relations with the Soviets. I can't imagine it was less scary to visit Russia in early 1980s than it would be to visit Tehran today.

Merry Green Shopping!

A NYT story dear to my confused and complex heart - A World Consumed by Guilt - it's complicated this holiday season...

So what can an unreformed consumer do in the face of green fashion that doesn’t always fit?

“Perfect doesn’t exist and we’re probably never going to get there,” said Leslie Hoffman, the executive director of Earth Pledge, a nonprofit group that promotes sustainable development and technologies. “We all make compromises every day. Making them with your eyes open instead of arbitrarily is the best piece of advice I could give.”

(Not) Shopping Till I'm Dropping!

My friend at Global Lab is always reminding me about neo-liberal economic principles and consumerism and he's not the only one! Today I learned (via Four Hour Work Week Blog) about some who are going the beyond the No-shopping-for-a-day! stuff, which always seems pointless to me. Some have tried no shopping for a year!

I enjoyed this little exchange on broken head phones. I wonder how long I could last in such a Compact. Of course, I know that ending shopping would end economic growth and we can do that, right, Global Lab. ;-) But it is nice to be pushed to think a bit harder about how often we run to the shop for a new set of head phones when many-a-friend probably has an extra pair. I have two extra if anyone needs a set.

Here are the rules they set up.

I also liked what a reader named liz said after reading the rules...

ah... america... where the upper class can take the higher ground by resolving to live a consumer life somewhat like the majority, who cannot afford to choose such a lifestyle choice, and publish their efforts to make themselves feel better, while arguing inane cop outs of their original decision. go for the gold team america!

OK, Liz, you are right, don't be such a little anti-american. Can't they pose the questions and dare to think a bit harder about it all? Humor us, please.

Oh yeah, and Buy(Less)!

Attention for the "Bottom Billion"

The Bottom Billion is worth a read. In fairness, I should read the End of Poverty since I already read and have been positively provoked by The White Man's Burden (which I don't feel places me on the right, as Collier suggests, anymore than I would call Sachs a defender of the left, but that is another story for other posts).

Summaries and reviews of Collier are plentiful, here and here and here so I won't bother with that.

I think it contributes some clarity to "conditionality" in the international development discussions and the term "governance conditionality" - that which is based on broadly agreed international norms - is an area I think might gain traction in a new information-obsessed world.

The greatest contribution is his analysis of laws and charters. Clearly, no international court is in the near future, but he cites the progress - note that I stop short of calling them "successes" - of initiatives like the Kimberly Process and Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative. I would add that voluntary initiatives such as the Equator Principles, which I use a lot in my work, are re-focusing the debate on role and responsibilities in international development. There is less turning a blind eye to the indirect impacts of our actions.

I was less offended than I expected to be about his arguments for military intervention. He certainly doesn't defend the blunders of Iraq and rather tries to re-think Somalia and Rwanda and how they might have followed a scenario more like what he considers to be successful interventions like Sierra Leone.

Still my favorite blog!

Congrats to Kedibonye Elijah, winner of the HIV essay contest, and especially to the two creators of Nata Blog. What an amazing model for getting support and sharing your stories.

C.A.R. Blog?!?

This is leap-frogging at its best! Kudos to the Humanitarian and Development Partners - Central African Republic for a Web 2.0-charged blog and intranet for Humanitarian and Development agencies. I learned about it from friend and was gutted to have missed the presentation of Tony Lanzer at the LSE. You can still see the presentation online with power point.

Everyone should learn a little bit about CAR..., but somewhat only an aid story. More on that later.

More on mosquito economics

To subsidize or not to subsidize, isn't that always the Economist's question? It was in Money v mosquito, asking whether the Gates Foundation and World Bank should subsidize a malaria remedy to keep the price down.

(Has anyone else noticed that when you wish to blog about something, you end of finding five more things you should read?)

That's Random

I am a fan of the potential of randomized trials and was pleased to read an article in the 25 Oct 2007 issue of Nature called Field Trials Aim to Tackle Poverty. The Poverty Action Lab, featured in the article, is a good resource for me, but I thought the article was a bit unfair to the "debate" over handing out malaria bed nets for free or charging. (Here's the paper for those wishing to review their development economics.) They take a swipe at Population Services International, an organization I have appreciated in many contexts, mostly as they push people (me, especially) to see aid and health programs as more than just supplying the needed goods. It also requires socil marketing to help change behavior, or so I thought.

Maybe I will spend Sunday afternoon reading this and see if I was wrong all along.