I’m amused by the obsession some folks have with Paul Krugman, the New York Times columnist and faux-economist. Not that I’m pro-Krugman. It’s just that economic ignorance is so widespread throughout the media, I find it silly to pile on one guy. Here’s a case of ignorance run amok in a small-town newspaper, the Bristol (Virginia) Herald-Courier. The subject is Barack Obama’s recent appointment of Aneesh Chopra as the federal government’s first-ever “chief technology officer”:
We are thrilled to see Chopra take this next step in his career. It is a feather in his cap, as well as for Virginia. As Virginia’s technology secretary, this Harvard University grad demonstrated his keen understanding of technology and government, and his ability to solve real-world problems.
Right off the bat, it’s important we know this guy went to Harvard. Obama’s not shopping for his CTO at Suffolk Community College. And we know he can “solve real-world problems” because he just spent several years working for, um, a state government.
During the president’s radio address announcing the appointment, Obama said he expects Chopra and others to set technology policy across government agencies and to use technology to improve security, lower costs and ensure transparency to the public.
Obama can’t be bothered to do any of this himself. He’s only the chief executive. Nor could any of the 2,000 or so existing employees of the Executive Office of the President fulfill this function. We need an entirely new office-within-the-office.
We support the creation of a national chief technology officer, and Chopra’s appointment to the position. The job has a broad mandate. A White House description states that the chief technology officer’s work must “transform our economy and our society,” by “fostering private sector innovation, reducing administrative costs and medical errors using health IT, and using technology to change the way teachers teach and students learn.”
One place you won’t find anything about Chopra’s “broad mandate” is the Constitution. I’m also guessing you won’t find it in any congressional legislation. And contrary to what the last paragraph said about Chopra setting “policy across government agencies,” now we’re told he’s also in charge of “private sector innovation” as well. This one man will “transform our economy and society.” Yet, curiously, Chopra couldn’t find a private sector job that would allow him to produce these fantastic results in the marketplace.
We encourage Chopra to develop a framework that includes these important priorities:
* Increase access to digital technologies. Too many places in the United States and worldwide lack access to high-speed Internet. Free-market demand drives much of the technology’s expansion, but government can and should help, particularly in less-served areas. Locally, government partnerships have helped expand high-speed Internet service into the Virginia coalfields to the benefit of schools, health care, business and citizen users. Such partnerships can and should do the same in other underserved places.
Today’s economic lesson: the market can create demand but not supply.
* Increase collaboration. Exciting and interesting initiatives are advanced every day in education, health care and science. Chopra must insist that leaders in those fields collaborate more, for the benefit of each other and all citizens. Sophisticated, organized use of technology and greater collaboration across fields will give users greater trust in its veracity. For decades we have been told more-personalized education and training would be possible by computer and Web-based programs. Such initiatives could boost student engagement and keep more students learning, instead of dropping out. As we have seen with telemedicine sites, technology can bring personalized, specialized medical care to patients, while eliminating travel. Technology will be the basis of our future health care system, especially as we try to contain costs and provide specialized care.
Chopra can “insist” on collaboration all he wants. I know some folks at the Federal Trade Commission who will insist on just the opposite. One bureaucrat’s mandatory collaboration is another’s illegal collusion.
* Ensure that technology serves people…
Who else would it serve, Klingons?
A big part of Chopra’s work will include rewriting laws to bring them up-to-date for the digital age…
Um, isn’t rewriting laws a job for Congress?
In all cases, we must remember that technology should serve people.
The Klingons will be very disappointed.
Copyright laws should reward the creative artists…
The creators of “Two and a Half Men” are out of luck.
…but allow the purchaser to use the content in a fair manner.
Luckily, Mr. Chopra has reviewed every creative work ever published, and he’s determined exactly how much use is “fair” for each of them.
The Internet should remain a neutral place.
The Internet can take sides?
Patent laws should ensure that new ideas are brought to the market quickly.
And nothing is quicker then a long process of bureaucratic review and litigation.
* Create a climate for more technology growth. For more jobs, we need more growth in technology. Chopra must formulate business incentives that reward the creative projects benefitting the most people. They should include new laws and new tax incentives for technology businesses. Additionally, barriers for new technology should be reduced as much as possible. As has happened in Virginia, if government becomes a model user of the technology, it can stimulate growth, make the public more familiar with the tools and reduce cost barriers.
Central planning? YES WE CAN!
* Transform government. This is an idea touted by many economists and technology experts – using information technology to modernize and improve government services…
Wow, how many economists and experts did it take to come up with this idea?
…Chopra and the committee should identify key areas for reducing costs, improving service delivery, speeding administrative processes, and improving efficiency. We already e-file our taxes and have tax refunds electronically deposited to bank accounts, but there are many other modern, efficient ways government could improve services.
Okay, that’s a fair point. Government has become more efficient at stealing our money then refunding a small percentage of it back to us.
Some people had hoped that Chopra’s job would be a cabinet-level post…
They ran out of chairs in the cabinet room. Someone forgot to plan ahead.
…but regardless of the rank of the position, its scope and influence is unmeasurable.
Perhaps Chopra can devise a means to measure it.
It is good news for business, science, medicine and education that our president is committing to more collaboration and focus on technology.
In addition to his focus on the auto industry, swine flu, Iraq, health insurance, global warming, Pakistan, mortgage defaults…
We expect to see Chopra, Kundra and the entire committee develop innovative ideas that bring useful and profitable information to more Americans.
So to sum up, a Harvard-trained bureaucrat can single-handedly outperform the entire market when it comes to developing and implementing new technology across all economic sectors.
{ 15 comments }
I’m having this wonderful fantasy that Chopra is giving his first speech, where he announces that all government will no longer use the virus/malware loaded Windows OS, changing to the excellent, high security, budget-slashing free-as-in-beer Linux as provided in open source by the NSA. (Really. It’s called Security Enhanced, or SE Linux)
Watching the stock price as the last of the unsustainable dot-com bubble-business-model giants falls.
Of course that will never happen, too much campaign contribution money from Micro$oft floating around. But still, it’s a nice fantasy.
This post is offensive! Klingons are people too.
Operation Chanology.
Could not agree with you more. The internet and the news media are supposed to be biast and not take sides. However, more and more we see that these medias are more apt to take sides. They fall in love with one person, place, country or whatever the case might be and that is all will you hear about. The interent should stay neutral, the news should be neutral and just report the news, but I am sure that is a thing of the past.
In the words of observer.
“OH! oh my brain! Oh it hurts. Ow.”
how can anyone think this is a good idea? We want to add more government to the sector of the economy we do not completely suck in?
Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
So lemme get this right? Having a CTO in private sector is good but in govt is bad? Huh? Isn’t it a good thing that maybe the govt would get…. dear god… more efficient by learning from the success of the private sector. Having a CTO is a good idea… Why knock it? Clearly would have been better if he hired someone from the goog or amazon
You get a Nobel physacist to run DOE…YAY! Some random dude to be CTO huh?
Hard to believe that these people are real isn’t it?
The world is just insane
Dugg. Someone stumble this please. It’s a great blog entry.
I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.
They are here “To Serve Man.”
@andrew
Hiring a CTO for a private corporation is good, for the corporation. The scope of the corporations power is limited by the production and market of that corporation.
A government has no such boundaries. Any additional seat created for anyone within the government organization is another seat of power from which restriction, regulation, regimentation, and ultimately slavery of one form or another can emanate.
The free market, on the whole, has much more capability inherent in it than any single mind of a man. To relegate the decisions affecting an entire nation to a single brain is stupidity self realized.
He is not going to be in charge of the government’s technology decisions. He is going to be in charge of YOUR technology decisions.
The CTO of a company is is charge of the technology decisions of that company only. His decisions will affect only the viability of that company. This is as it should be.
Chopra’s mandate is to do this for YOU. I don’t want him, or anybody else doing that FOR me. It’s not FOR me. I trust the countless other legitimate CTO’s in their limited capacities within their private companies. I trust the market, the US market of 350,000,000 brains to make the decisions that affect the progress of the nation. I don’t think for a moment that reducing the decision making of a live national market “mind” to one brain from Harvard is such a good deal. Try it yourself. Try to make one technology decision with just one brain cell and see how far you get!
Heck, just go to your local town council meeting and see what it means to delegate thinking to a few “Harvard Brains”. Watch CSPAN for while. Get a clue. Government isn’t about improvement, it’s about control, tightening the leash one thread at a time.
The idea that a government official can be in charge of private sector innovation is beyond ludicrous. When it comes to technology and innovation, the government is always on the trailing edge, not the leading edge. If it weren’t for private innovation forcibly dragging them along, the government would not be using computers at all yet.
I was working recently with a client vetting another position for the Obama cabinet. We had to connect him to the State Department computer system so he could do his report. The system was using 15yr. old technology. They are upgrading soon to “newer” tech that is only 5yrs old. I’m sure the company that got the contract is thrilled.
A bureaucracy is not about change. It is about inertia. It’s purpose is not to innovate, but instead to stagnate. No bureaucratic system was ever created that did otherwise.
The free market on the other hand is all about change. Stagnation in the market is means certain “death” to the business that rests on the status quo. Unless that business is to support bureaucracy, in which case it’s “success” depends on the stagnation of the bureaucratic system itself, like a leech on a corpse.
Perhaps Mr. Chopra’s first mandate will be to have the TOTUS (Teleprompter of the United States)(term borrowed from Karen DeCoster) working on more than just an intermittant basis.
I very much appreciated the suggestions in this blog that you share with us…
Comments on this entry are closed.