What big government can do for you
The arguments against big government are fairly straight-forward and they often dominate our political conversation.
Taxes gobble up our hard-earned money, preventing us from spending and investing freely.
Regulation stifles freedom and innovation.
Surely, bureaucrats aren’t the best people to run an economy. Leave that to the bankers, right?
Obviously, it’s a lot more complicated than that.
Conservatives have tried to make the case that the Great American Recession was caused by Big Government meddling.
But most of that’s just politics.
The vast majority of experts will tell you that the finance industry, having moved into new and largely unregulated territory, shot itself in the head.
The rest of us were collateral damage.
But set aside, for the moment, that kind of controversial and complicated debate.
And set aside heated questions about whether the private sector failed to find ways to insure and deliver affordable health care to tens of millions of Americans.
You will still find big bread-and-butter cases where it appears that we would have been safer with more — not less — government.
Exhibit A is the Toyota automobile recall.
This major international corporation allegedly concealed for months the fact that its cars “had a tendency for mechanical failure in accelerator pedals of a certain manufacturer on certain models.”
According to a New York Times report, one of the car company’s executives wrote a memo arguing that “the time to hide on this one is over. We need to come clean.”
It didn’t happen, until government regulators finally waded in.
Exhibit B is the tragic mine disaster in West Virginia. Nearly thirty workers dead. And according to the Washington Post:
[The] Upper Big Branch Mine has been cited for safety violations 1,342 times since 2005. Eighty-six of those citations — 12 of them coming just last month — involved failing to follow a mine ventilation plan to control methane and coal dust.
Would more effective and aggressive government intervention have saved those miners? I think the answer is probably yes.
Seen in the abstract, government can look like an all-swallowing leviathan.
But if government isn’t the answer, how do average Americans — workers, consumers, normal people — prevent the companies and corporations that shape much of our lives from doing bad things?
How do we make sure our food is safe, our houses are well built, and our airliners will land safely?
Thank God, if it wasn't for Big Government, I'd be afraid to even get out of bed in the morning.
Sure government has a role in protecting consumers, workers, the environment, etc. from the bad apples.But then you have agencies like the APA which are big government gone wild.
Balance is key. No one wants Soviet-style totalitarianism. But I'd rather not live in a libertarian paradise like Somalia either.
It's interesting to me that my parents generation, who grew up in the Great Depression, World War Two, and the Cold War, steadfastly viewed the government as their friend and salvation. Indeed, that was a good deal of the conflict between their generation and mine during the 1960's. To them, it was inconceivable that people would speak of our government with disdain and distrust. The real watershed moment in all of this was in 1980 when Ronald Reagan declared that " … government is the problem, not the solution". Added to this was the parallel assertion that Free Market Fundamentalism and "Trickle -down economics", would be the forces to deliver us from government, eg Government, BAD, Business, GOOD. In light of the events of the past 2 or 3 years, this calculus is obviously flawed and overly simplistic. We need to spend less energy on ideological absolutes and more attention to what actually serves the greater good for people.
It's interesting to me that my parents generation, who grew up in the Great Depression, World War Two, and the Cold War, steadfastly viewed the government as their friend and salvation. Indeed, that was a good deal of the conflict between their generation and mine during the 1960's. To them, it was inconceivable that people would speak of our government with disdain and distrust. The real watershed moment in all of this was in 1980 when Ronald Reagan declared that " … government is the problem, not the solution". Added to this was the parallel assertion that Free Market Fundamentalism and "Trickle-Down" economics would be the force to deliver us from government. Government BAD, Business, GOOD. In light of the events of the past 2 or 3 years, this calculus is obviously flawed. We need to spend less energy serving ideological absolutes, (socialism, communism, economic darwinism etc), and more energy on finding solutions that serve people best.
Brian, you pot stirrer you, as usual you make me shake my head. "Big Government". Define that please. And while you're at it tell me this- just how much more/bigger Gov't (PCB) will it take to end mine disasters, manufacturing defects and Wall St suits from screwing up? Do we need 20 PCB workers following every "citizen" around second guessing every move every worker/administrator/investor/boss makes? While I understand the sentiment that "Gov't" will somehow oversee the idiots out here in flyover country and correct all our stupid errors, incorrect thinking and common sense solutions that have worked for generations, I think our current bloated bureaucracy is inefficient, wasteful and huge enough already.Instead of clamoring for "bigger government" why not move towards effective government? Bigger gov't is the antithesis to effective gov't in almost every case. We currently have duplication at many levels of gov't (PCB), we have redundant programs, multiple enforcement agencies, make work projects that produce little if anything. I cannot think of a single issue that does not have a PCB agency of some sort to regulate, oversee, fine and hamper progress of that endeavor.The facts are that there is more than enough "government" currently in place. The systems to address the examples you gave not only exist, they have huge numbers of workers, regulations, notification systems and enforcement agencies. What your examples show isn't a need for MORE government (Ponderous Corrupt Bureaucracies) but rather a need for effective efficient gov't. All your examples do is show what a waste of money our PCB has become.So please tell me how Bigger Government is going to make it all better?
In both of cited examples it could also be argued that unions could have helped.
Hmmm. "Big Government". Is that anything like "Big Oil"? Or are oil companies a perfect example of good ole fashion free market capitalisim?
"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."It certainly is a balancing act.How about adjusting the scales?How about some more political parties? Say 3 to 5 in total.How about massive campaign finance reform? End the quid pro quo, the nepotism, the cronyism…I'd say start there with the fundamentals of a democracy instead of layering more Govt. fixes and privateer backlash/ corporatism, greed, and corruption.
"So please tell me how Bigger Government is going to make it all better?"Bret, way to put words into my mouth, as usual Especially since I specifically said that too big government can be just as bad as too little government.I agree that efficient government is the key. My point was to counter the claims of some that government action is, IN AND OF ITSELF, illegitimate.I trust you're savvy enough to understand the distinction.
This is a good post but I think there are some things that are not accurately commented on.“the private sector failed to find ways to insure and deliver affordable health care to tens of millions of Americans”. Last count the private sector was insuring about 255 million Americans. Perhaps the “affordability” question is valid. Let’s wait and see what adding another 25 million Americans quickly to a system short on doctors will do to the cost and quality of care in this country. But you can’t argue that the private sector doesn’t insure a lot of people now. “Would more effective and aggressive government intervention have saved those miners? I think the answer is probably yes.” How is this? The mine was already in violation of a whole bunch of regulations. What would more have done? The government failed to enforce the regulations it had. That is not a case for bigger government but for one that worked. Perhaps a good argument for leaner more efficient one yes, but change the title of this post if that is the case.“Exhibit A is the Toyota automobile recall.” This is a highly regulated and monitored industry the last time I checked. Like Brian’s comments say the company concealed the problem. How is more regulation going to solve that problem? It might make you feel more safe, and it will certainly make cars more expensive, but it isn’t a solid case for “bigger government” in my opinion. Brian are you suggesting that if regulators ran the companies it would be a more effective system?The first thing last. “The vast majority of experts will tell you that the finance industry, having moved into new and largely unregulated territory, shot itself in the head.” This is not a “complicated” debate. The statement is correct, and then the government stepped in and bailed them out and now they think they are invincible. That is a case for less government not more. You can bank on lots more collateral damage after the next crash and it will eventually come, you can’t run from history. You can’t regulate away another crash, it didn’t work in all the other highly regulated financial markets and it won’t work here. It will make people feel all warm and fuzzy inside and that is about it. But that is a good way to get elected so we will see lots of hand waving and cheering when more regulations are enacted later this year.Brian, this type of post where you kind of claim the cure for all that ails us is more government certainly shows what part of the political spectrum you fall into, but it doesn’t really make much sense when you look closely at these cases.
Since there is a lot of folks sending in comments where they disagree with Brian, take a look at someone below in the Times Union that agrees with the premise of this post regarding what government can do for you. In this op-ed John Sheehan, president of the Adirondack Council, attempts to make the case that the "prosperity" of the Adirondack economy is due to several NYS government strategies. First the large scale purchase by the government of private land for addition to the NYS forest preserve, and second the state imposed land use regulations administered by the Adirondack Park Agency. So if you follow John's logic, and perhaps Brain's in this post, "bigger government is better government". (see the letter here: http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=920508&category=OPINION&TextPage=2)
Unfortunately the word "bigger" is taken a bit too literal by some.We want functioning oversight with realistic repercussions.Maybe if real fines were imposed upon the mining company responsible, all those lives could have been saved.But then again, those fines would have the corporation threatening layoffs and labeling the local Representative as anti-growth.No campaign money for him next election cycle and his opponent who trumpets "bigger" government is the devil, gets elected (with the financial backing of the coal industry who probably receives tons of tax breaks which leaves regulatory agencies thinned out).http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2010/02/02/rockefeller-defends-tax-breaks-for-big-coal/Solutions are on the shelf. We just need to take them off.
The solution is to close a mine that breaks the rules over and over. It doesn't take more regulations or regulators to do that.
Brian F, I'm sorry I didn't make myself clear. I was addressing Brian Mann. I agree with your post, although I imagine the details in our perspective differ.
"Last count the private sector was insuring about 255 million Americans."Then how many people are being insured by Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans Administration and the Department of Defense?
Still waiting for an answer on your opinion on just how much bigger our Ponderous Corrupt Bureaucracy needs to be to "fix" everything Brian M. I really am interested in your opinion. But any justification for a larger Gov't needs something other than supposition and hope to meet the mark.
PCS good correction. Currently about 60% of the country is covered under a private health insurance plan. My guess is that would leave 25% covered by the other public programs that are available. It is about 85% of the county covered now and 93% if the new health care law is effective.