It is said that the best government is a benevolent dictatorship. Maybe, for a while. The concept of democracy is superior but it sure has been abused, counterfeited, and wasted around the world. Monarchy worked for feudal societies who felt, or had no choice, that a grand guardian in those times of invasion and pillage was worth absolute servitude. The United States broke out of that monarchy mold (thank you, George Washington) and forged an admirable democratic experiment that became the world’s proud example. Although its form was highly debated at the time, as noted in the Federalist Papers, and it was severely challenged in the Civil War, it has persevered, and it fully blossomed in the 20th Century. As with all great governments in history, however, US democracy is now rotting from within and will undoubtedly be replaced unless it reboots.
How is it rotting? Congress is inept, the Executive branch is insane, and by default, the Supreme Court has been left to run the government, a role never anticipated by the Constitution. Examples of government by Supreme Court include abortion, gun control, and immigration. Our deficit and the nation’s inability to create a budget are examples of Congress’ ineptitude. (There have been only 4 complete budgets in the past 40 years and government shutdowns due to failed Continuing Resolutions are increasing.) And voting, the very basis of democracy, has become a farce. Gerrymandering, voting rights manipulation, and voter apathy ensure a government that is not representative. Social media and internet hacking by enemy governments are also trying their best to ruin our elections.
So what to do? Diminish the role of the federal government. The balance between state and federal rights has been debated since the Constitutional Convention and came to a head during the Civil War. Having won that battle, the feds started consolidating their power and taking control of more and more. The states played right into this with their pockets of racism, cronyism, and lackadaisical education so that the public learned to rely on the feds for fairness, uniformity, and implementation. The Constitution says that the states can run only whatever the feds don’t want so the feds had the contract on their side. World events, such as world wars and the depression, bolstered the advantages of a federal effort, so the public became believers. But now it has grown into an ugly beast that is more interested in eating than protecting. Let the feds establish national standards and have the states implement them.
This role of federal standards with state implementation is already established in some parts of government – environmental regulation, for example. Muddled attempts that waste money, also exist – education, for example. With the federal government ensuring a level playing field, but implementation (including taxation along with spending) is left more local, we can have more representative programs with better financial efficiency.
New Hampshire has limited income tax and no sales tax with a low budget that is 5th from the bottom (per capita), yet it has great roads, efficient services, is near the top in education, and stays out of your face. State governments can do a lot. Thirty-eight states have mandatory balanced budgets. The federal government, on the other hand, spends money irresponsibly and trails other countries in so many things such as the lack of universal health care (it is the only developed country in the world without it); abysmal education (only 25th in the world), an untethered health care system (e.g., Medicare can’t even negotiate drug prices) that is 18% of our economy, and a $800 Billion/yr deficit.
A financial system that sends money to the top so as to trickle it downward while feeding the top is inherently inefficient. The 2015 federal $3.8 Trillion budget, your taxes plus borrowing, went to: 64% mandatory spending (e.g., social security, Medicare, food stamps, and some transportation, veterans’ and agriculture expenses); 16% military; 7% debt service, 2% education; 2% housing; and 6% everything else, each of which is 1% or less (e.g., energy, environment, transportation, international, etc). Those are budget numbers – the cost of the bureaucracy plus the cost of the program – it doesn’t seem possible to ferret out the former, which would be useful to understand for streamlining overhead costs, with commensurate tax savings, by shrinking the federal bureaucracy albeit with some state bureaucracy growth. In addition to the financial argument, it stands to reason that implementation at a more local level (under federal minimum standards) would be more representative of the voters’ needs.
After restructuring taxes to send the money more directly to where it is spent, here are some guidelines for the possible roles of the several governments:
Federal Government – policies benefitting the nation by standardization (e.g., a national health care standard, civil rights, educational standards, etc.); safety nets; things benefitting from economies of scale; international relations (including defense, diplomacy, trade, and immigration); federal level transportation (e.g., interstate highways, airports, railroads, shipping, etc.); national lands.
State Government – implementation of national policies (including health care); education (shared with local governments); state level transportation; state land.
Local Government – education; safety; local roads, ambiance; local land.
If we can’t fix it with something like this, let’s at least get a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.