You Can't Fix What You Want Broken

In the recent vice-presidential debate, Governor Sarah Palin criticized the Federal Government, saying "unless you're pleased with the way the federal government has been running anything lately, I don't think that it's going to be real pleasing for Americans to consider health care being taken over by the feds". With this statement, Gov. Palin parroted a common conservative mantra that the government is the problem not the solution, while asking the public for the opportunity to lead that same institution. This creates an inherent paradox. How can you fix something you don't believe in?

During the Clinton presidency, while there were legitimate debates about government policies, few would argue that the government was working admirably by historical standards. This was largely due to the Clinton era National Partnership for Reinventing Government. This program, focused on "transforming the culture in major agencies with the most public contact to be more results-oriented, performance-based, and customer-focused"(1) resulted in a plethora of improvements in government function. During this time, government appointments were more likely to rely upon professional qualifications and merit rather than political patronage. Even candidate George W. Bush during his 2000 run for president famously complimented FEMA under James Lee Witt, "James Lee Witt of FEMA has done a really good job of working with governors during times of crisis". Of course, Mr. Witt was a career emergency management professional appointed due to merit not patronage.

While anti-government rhetoric gained its most populist foothold during the "Reagan Revolution", in the years of the Bush Administration, the anti-government ideology espoused by Grover Norquist has found purchase in the highest levels of the Federal Government. Regulatory agencies have been compromised by political appointments selected from the industries that the agencies regulate, with obvious conflict of interest ramifications. Staffing decisions regarding the rebuilding efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan have been made based upon political affiliations. Even the justice department has been compromised by political considerations. In short, the years of Republican dominance have left a federal government with a track record of poor performance that draws references to the HMS Titanic or the Hindenburg. The conservative revolution has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

So the question is, who would you choose to fix an ailing government and financial system? Somebody whose political future depends on the failure of the very institutions they are asking to lead? I hope not.

(1) History of the National Partnership for Reinventing Government, http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/whoweare/appendixf.html