Monday, January 16, 2012

Sometimes Less is More


As Congress was finishing up its legislative session for 2011, several watchdog agencies noticed that the term “do-nothing Congress” was actually supported by the numbers.  By the end of November, President Obama had signed only 62 new laws, making 2011 a record low year for new federal legislation.
                Have no fear. While Congress debated, delayed and dissembled, the 50 states stepped up to the plate with about 40,000 (yes, that’s forty thousand) new laws. Georgia will have safer golf carts in 2012. New Yorkers will no longer be allowed to sell or possess bear gall bladders.  There will be no happy hour in Utah and residents of Oregon will not be allowed to sell shark fins. In Nevada, fire performers and their apprentices will now have to register with the state fire marshal.
                The role that government plays in the lives of its people is a determining factor in the life span of any civilization. Too little involvement results in anarchy. The powerful act with impunity as the rule of law is replaced by the law of the jungle. The history of the warring states of China is a classic example. Too much government intervention and civilization dies a slow, lingering death as innovation and free enterprise is strangled. The Soviet Union comes to mind in this example.
                We do not know yet how the American experiment will turn out. As our republic has been gradually replaced by a form of oligarchy and the size of all forms of government has increased along  with the coercive power of government, we are beginning to see signs that the results will not all be to our liking.
                For those of us fond of free markets and the freedoms we still associate with our American heritage, less government is best. Government should provide for the common defense, but refrain from building financial and military empires. Government should level the playing field for business, but it should not protect favored enterprises from failure. In fact, after securing the basic needs of existence for those unable to provide their own, government should not protect anyone from failure.
                Failure is natural and it is healthy. Failure informs bad decisions and inspires better ones.  Failure improves society, but by adding 40-50 thousand new laws every year, many of which are designed to protect us from the consequences of our actions, a nanny state replaces a nation of pioneers and innovators.
                So overall I am quite pleased that Congress failed to act in 2011. Rather than creating new laws and regulations I would prefer that if Congress (and every form of government right down to the local level) were to act at all, it would be to un-do much of what has already been done. For example, If Congress had failed to act in interfering with the pensions of post office employees, the post office would now be in the black instead of facing insolvency.
                Government (including the executive branch) which does the least is often in the long run of unintended consequences the best for the people who must endure those consequences.  Every politician for the last 40 years has promised smaller government and less spending, but every year the size of government, the intrusiveness of government and the coercive powers of government have grown. Perhaps we should be grateful that Washington seems paralyzed by divisiveness. Until we are ready to make fundamental change, perhaps we should endeavor to change as little as possible.