Skip to main content

Not Much Will Change


It doesn't matter which party gets a majority in the House or the Senate, not much is going to change in the way government runs. Will we stop unconstitutional programs? No. Will we cut wasteful spending? No. Why? Because our representatives do exactly what we want them to do.

I'm writing this post on election day, before the polls close, with breath baited beyond anything that has ever been baited before. Democrats pontificate that it's high time for a change, and so that's why they're going to take over the House and Senate. Republicans tout the recent improvement in poll numbers to prognosticate that they're going to win.

Maybe they will, maybe they won't. It's all very entertaining, the conservative pundits punding and the liberal news organizations editorializing--and we get vignettes about Mark Foley and John Kerry absolutely free(!), but you know what? It really doesn't matter. But this thought occurs to me as I think of the intelligence and alacrity of the
average American voter:
“Perhaps the fact that we have seen millions voting themselves into complete dependence on a tyrant has made our generation understand that to choose one’s government is not necessarily to secure freedom.” —Fredrich August von Hayek
We don't have a tyrant yet. But we do have dependence. And we vote ourselves into more and more of it.

Robert Samuelson captures the essence of why it doesn't matter in his editorial in the Washington Post. Synthesis: We get what we want when we vote. And we want things that, due to their contrast, shouldn't be wanted by the same person at the same time. Boiled down to its essence, our representatives do what we tell them to. We have met our representatives, and they are us. We get further and further toward nowhere because we haven't the ability to hold our representatives responsible to do their jobs well. We enjoy--and thus we have become a part of--the circus.

When asked if the government is wasteful when it comes to spending, nearly everyone says yes. But nearly no one can agree that the spending for some of the most wasteful programs should be cut.

It doesn't matter whether we are Republican or Democrat when it comes to most issues. We want Congress to reduce spending, but we must have our Community Development Block Grants, Educational Grants, Social Security, and Medicare. The two opinions are diametrically opposed.

We have become so enamored with a two-party system that we perceive only two options: (1) if the Democrats are in power, let's throw the bums out and put the republicans in, and (2) if the Republicans are in power, let's throw the bums out and put the Democrats in.

Do we ever stop to think that it doesn't make much difference at all? There's not even 8 cents worth of difference between the two major parties, yet we campaign and debate and argue like it makes all the difference in the world.

The problem is not them. It is us. Our problem has the potential of becoming a never-ending cycle of (1) Claiming that the current bums in office have failed, and (2) voting in a new set of bums with the chimerical hope that something will change, until finally (1) happens all over again. Until we decide that we want government to limit itself to its proper role, not much will change. Government is what we make of it and nothing else. We deserve nothing better.

Comments

  1. Frank,

    Thank you for your comments over on OneUtah.org

    I need to call you on your “independent Mormon” claim. After reading a couple of your blog posts, I’d say you are a “thoughtful” Mormon but seem nevertheless to be bound up in a strict loyalty to the same. Ultimately, your positions are quite in line with classic religious conservative one’s.

    Let us review:
    You believe the Government has the right and obligation to give a zygote the EXACT same rights as a taxpaying adult and to interfere with a woman's reproductive decisions on behalf of an organism.

    In response to the recent democratic victory, you argue that both parties are virtually identical and nothing will change saying, “There's not even 8 cents worth of difference between the two major parties.” Excuse me? Frank please. I won’t elaborate on this any further, but instead give you a chance to retract that statement.

    You argue “if adults were allowed to carry guns in schools, there would be fewer of the kind of wanton incidents that have been all the rage lately.” You forgot to mention we should train students to use textbooks like body armor.

    You argue for oil independence rather than conservation and alternatives while proudly boasting about driving a Yukon.

    By the way, the title of your post, “Energy Alternatives…” must be a mistake since you don’t mention “alternatives” anywhere in the post. “Alternatives” refers to energy not place to drill.

    You said, “Robert H. Bork should be a Justice” and used the WRONG definition of con·sti·tu·tion·al to make the new and fundamentally wrong assertion that there is some sort of interpretation of the constitution that is not a function of how judges rule -- a really tired argument that was invented only in recent years as talking points for the evangelical community. If you can find any scholarly discussion of these new constitutional concepts dating back to even the mid-nineties, I will be a monkey’s uncle. Not even Bork suggested this. Do you see the hypocrisy here?

    You argue that mass transit is a “colossal waste of money” a far right conservative and very wrong statement.

    And finally, you eschew moral relativity for your personal (and relative) religious beliefs.

    I couldn’t find anything on your blog about gay rights, but I could probably make a pretty accurate guess.

    In summary Frank, you are a classic right-wing conservative (libertarian if not republican) well-armed with all the talking points. And like it or not, we liberals love you anyway, for the simple reason that you exist, think, and struggle.

    Thanks for being part of this community. With you permission, I would like to add your blog to OneUtah's blog roll. http://economicspolitics.blogspot.com/

    I look forward to finding equilibrium with your somewhere, someday.

    Peace and Love
    Cliff

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thank you for commenting. If you have a Google/Blogger account, to be apprised of ongoing comment activity on this article, please click the "Subscribe" link below.

Popular posts from this blog

Red Clothing and Resurrection: Jesus Christ's Second Coming

The scriptures teach that when Christ comes again to the earth, that he will be wearing red apparel. Why red ? They also teach that at Christ's coming, many of the dead will become resurrected. Will this only include members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? Not by a long shot, no matter what some Mormon might tell you.

School Vouchers: "The Bramble Memo"

$429 million? What? Where? The legislative fiscal analyst for the State of Utah calculated the costs to the public schools over the next 13 years if school vouchers are implemented. It said the costs would be $5.5M in the first year, and $71M in the 13th year. Suddenly, the number I have started seeing thrown around was $429 million, the total costs for vouchers over 13 years. Where did that number come from? Enter the mysterious "Bramble Memo". In the past few days several of us (Jeremy, Utah Taxpayer, Craig, Sara, Urban Koda, Jesse, and me) have (sometimes?) enjoyed a lively discussion about school vouchers in Utah . Jeremy clarified to me the costs of the venture by linking to a copy of the Utah Legislative Fiscal Analyst's Impartial Analysis (LFA) of the costs of Vouchers , found on "The Senate Site". In my previous voucher article, I quoted some of Lavar Webb's article from last Sunday's Deseret News, wherein he stated that those total costs ...

What's Your Reaction to California's Decision on Same-Sex Marriage?

Yesterday a "Republican-dominated" California Supreme Court struck down state laws against same-sex marriages. The LDS Church issued a press release, calling the decision "unfortunate". I agree, but not for reasons you might think. Did the California Court make the right decision? Update 5/17/2008 : California decision does not affect prohibitions against polygamy and marriage of close relatives. Why not? Government should not sanction same-sex marriages for the same reason that it should not sanction heterosexual adultery--such activities tend to be destructive to the family as the fundamental unit of society. Before you get too far into reading into my words, let me echo and agree with something that Madeleine Albright wrote in her recent book, The Mighty & The Almighty (one of the better books that I have read in a long time): I oppose discrimination against gays and lesbians and am convinced that heterosexual adultery is a greater danger to the institu...