There's an old joke about the man who was asked in a poll, "Do you
think the nation has a problem with ignorance and apathy?" To which
he responded, "I don't know and I don't care."
That wasn't one of the questions asked in a recent national poll commissioned
by the Washington Post, the Kaiser Family Foundation and Harvard University.
But those who conducted the poll concluded that they got the equivalent
of that answer from a lot of people. Many Americans simply are tuned out
of national politics, the polltakers said. For example, four out of 10 couldn't
name the vice president.
Maybe the results do show widespread ignorance and apathy among the electorate
(or potential electorate). But a discouraging alternative possibility is
that maybe, just maybe, a lot of people have decided they can make better
use of their time doing something else. It certainly does not promote the
democratic process when one contemplates that, no matter who is elected
president or U.S. senator or representative, after the election we'll still
have to deal with the same old people and the same old rules and regulations
at the Internal Revenue Service and Social Security and the Environmental
Protection Agency and all the rest of government; and we'll still
face as much paperwork and senseless nit-picking as now.
Little by little over the past 60 years, a series of Congresses and presidents
created the bureaucratic leviathan that tries to control so much of our
daily lives, and is so unresponsive to the public will. As the late libertarian
economist Murray Rothbard wrote, "A permanent bureaucracy does not
lend itself to changes in political efforts."
Even Congress and the president are often thwarted by the creature they
have spawned. When Dwight Eisenhower was elected president, Harry Truman
said, "Poor Ike. It won't be a bit like the Army. He'll sit here and
he'll say, 'Do this, do that,' and nothing will happen."
That was in 1952. Today there are dozens more bureaus, agencies and departments
of the federal government, all with their own sets of regulations, most
crafted with the best of intentions but nevertheless often causing confusion,
gridlock and frustration. Sometimes they provoke laughter as well.
For example: EEOC rulings that Hooters must hire male waitresses;
chest hair and all; and that fitting attendants in women's clothing
store dressing rooms must sometimes be male as well. But what about ladies
who might be changing and bare to the waist? "Bare above the waist
or below it, what's the difference?" one bureaucrat was alleged to
have said. -
For example: EEOC rulings that Hooters must hire male waitresses;
chest hair and all; and that fitting attendants in women's clothing
store dressing rooms must sometimes be male as well. But what about ladies
who might be changing and bare to the waist? "Bare above the waist
or below it, what's the difference?" one bureaucrat was alleged to
have said.
Large numbers of people are disturbed about the influence; the bad
influence, in their opinion; government rules and regulations have
had on their family lives; the direction of their schools, and the
quality of their health care; the encouragement of out-of-wedlock births,
and the government's effort to outlaw any public display of religion.
This doesn't necessarily mean that government employees are bad people.
They too are taxpayers, citizens and family members. But people who hold
power over other people are going to exercise that power. Those who regulate
are going to write more regulations. Some regulators; the EPA offers
some prime examples; are so arrogantly zealous that they keep trying
to criminalize more and more activities that aren't crimes. For example,
John Pozsgai of Morrisville, Pennsylvania, went to prison for cleaning up
old tires and rusting cars and putting clean fill dirt on some land he had
bought. Why? Because the EPA considered the dump a wetland.
To add insult to injury, one reason taxes are high is to pay government
employees higher wages than the private sector offers. In 1991, for example,
the average pay of federal employees was 26% higher than that of private
sector employees. And when fringe benefits and time off were considered,
federal pay was 64% higher.
Considering the pervasiveness of government bureaucracy in our lives, perhaps
the wonder is that more Americans haven't disconnected from government,
and decided they'd rather quit than fight. This kind of disaffection is
bad for democracy.
One reason the Republicans' Contract With America caused so much excitement
among the electorate was that it seemed to promise something of a mini-revolution
in the way the government works. But the Contract's proposals were watered
down in the Senate, and stone-walled or vetoed at the White House. So, not
much has changed, and people shake their heads and say, "see...it doesn't
work."
For years the politicians have tried to use a scalpel to remove the bureaucratic
cancers. It hasn't worked. So maybe it's time for a meat ax. The polls show
that lots of people think so.
The National Center for Policy Analysis is a public policy research institute
founded in 1983 and internationally known for its studies on public policy
issues. The NCPA is headquarters in Dallas, Texas, with an office in Washington,
D.C.