Paul Farmer, an anthropologist and Harvard-trained physician, may be heading to the U.S. Agency for International Development, a troubled institution that has been without a leader since President Obama's inauguration.

Dr. Farmer has spent much of his professional life living and working in impoverished areas in Haiti and Rwanda, trying to improve access to healthcare and promote healthier lifestyles aimed at preventing illnesses.

As the vetting process continues out of the public eye, USAID watchers are handicapping the chances that Farmer will be appointed. His life's work and his outlook on international development have earned him the praise of activists, who are thrilled by the thought of him running USAID. However, his harsh criticism of American foreign policy may find him at odds with the Senate, who must approve of his nomination if it should come.

Still, his career arc as an outsider working towards change has parallels to Barack Obama's (pre-bailout, anyway). The only thing that may hold back Dr. Farmer, especially considering the Democratic majority in the Senate, is his own tolerance for Beltway politics.

Even if he doesn't end up leading USAID, Farmer may take another position working on global health policy at either USAID or the State Department. As an admirer of Dr. Farmer, former President Bill Clinton thinks that he should be in Washington in some capacity. He recently told blogger Lindsay Beyerstein that Dr. Farmer was a "magnificent man", and praised his NGO, Partners in Health, saying that it did work that could shape the way the U.S. government approaches foreign aid.

AID in need of aid

Farmer's rumored impending appointment couldn't come soon enough for the embattled development agency, whose importance appears to be growing as quickly as its competence is receding. Even if Farmer doesn't wind up as the chief of USAID, after going six months without one, the development agency could do with an appointment soon, as it is in need of both direction and vigilant administration.

USA Today revealed this week that concerns about corruption forced USAID to suspend a $644 million reconstruction program in Iraq. Due to the misallocation of funds by Iraqi leaders, and the inability of the American contractor International Relief and Development to oversee the program, USAID decided to review the contract, known as the Community Stabilization Program. It was reported that some of the public's money was even finding its way into the pockets of insurgents in Iraq.

The most recent scandal in Iraq, however, is eclipsed by USAID's history of missteps in Afghanistan. With its large reserves of oil, at least Iraq has the potential to invest significantly in its own development. Afghanistan, on the other hand, is not blessed with an abundance such a profitable (legal) resource, and could most likely use the help. With the war there entering a watershed period, USAID could be quite useful in providing that help to a country starved of it. Unfortunately, the development agency still has no clear strategy, and, like other government agencies, is seeing taxpayer money lost to middlemen through a flawed contracting system.

The longer USAID is without a leader, the longer these problems are likely to remain. The longer these problems remain, the longer the U.S. army can expect to be bogged down in Afghanistan (and Iraq).

The Department of Defense isn't the only federal agency that would like to see USAID make progress, either. At a town hall-style meeting with USAID employees two weeks ago, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told workers that she was frustrated "beyond words" by the lack of an appointment --- a void she blamed on an overbearing vetting process. The protocol set by the White House demands that candidates disclose financial and personal information, including revealing every place that they have lived since the age of 18 and the name of every foreign citizen that they know. (Whether they've paid taxes is an entirely different matter.) 

Clinton even asked the White House if she could tell employees that an appointment was imminent, but her request was denied. What she did tell employees though, was that the process was so demanding -- candidates have to hire lawyers and accountants to prove their worth -- that many would-be candidates declined to go through it. "Some very good people don't want to be vetted," she said.

Dr. Farmer, at least, appears willing to put up with it. But only time and the process itself will tell whether or not he ends up as USAID administrator under President Obama.

Previously:

[+] The Fog of Wartime Contracting