The other day I listened to a well known liberal talk about how a particular piece of legislation was needed because it would "make things better". I found the fact that anybody could still be trying to convince people the way to a better life is through government intervention to be pretty interesting.
First off, if government legislation was going to improve the quality of life just by its existence, the current amount of our "legislation” should make the United States the most utopian place on the face of the earth. Since the Obama administration has taken to sponsoring and passing bills over two thousand pages in length, if it were indeed true that government legislation is the key to happiness and "better life", I would say we would have arrived by now.
Oddly however; the more our government legislates, the less happy we seem to be. Hmm, I wonder if there is some correlation between the amount of legislation by our federal government and the rising amount of discontent in our country. Hey, I know, how about having the GSA use some of the money they were going to spend on their annual soirée to Las Vegas this year to fund a study on this very subject. If they can spare the time from lavish, over the top, expensive parties (I know, quite the sacrifice, but public service is supposed to be a calling, not a job) they could study the correlation between (over) regulation by government and the tendency of the (over) regulated to express their dissatisfaction with, wait for it, too much government regulation and interference with their lives.
Sadly, we are going to have to wait for any such study from the GSA, after all, since they were caught throwing a lavish and expensive "do" in Vegas, there is a vacancy at the head of the agency. Not to worry, I'm sure there is some bureaucrat waiting in the wings who is willing to step into the breach.
There is one more point I'd like to make about the head of the GSA being fired. That point is that while most of the press is reporting the head of the agency has either quit, or is being fired, for wasting taxpayer dollars, that can't be correct. After all, if wasting taxpayer dollars, or even just being caught wasting taxpayer dollars were a firing offense for federal employees, we would be having massive forced resignations and firings. Why there probably aren't enough planes in the Washington D.C area to provide seats for all of the federal employees that would need to leave there if it were possible to fire people for wasting money. I do think it would be worth looking into though, I personally would not consider some taxpayer money spent shipping bureaucrats out of Washington D.C. on one way severance trips home to be an actual waste. I think that would be money well spent, consider it an investment in the future (maybe in November; I can dream can't I?)
Since Arne Duncan (secretary of education), Steven Chu (secretary of energy), Eric Holder (attorney general), and a whole host of other people I can think of aren't following the head of the GSA into "involuntary retirement", I have to make a different inference.
Given that the only thing that the GSA did was throw a lavish, taxpayer funded, party in Las Vegas, I have to draw the conclusion that when The Obama told people not to go to Las Vegas and spend a bunch of money, by golly he meant it. Apparently, wasting a lot of money is okay, as long as you do it in California (Solyndra) or maybe New York (ENER1 who went bankrupt with over one hundred million dollars of "federal grants"). Say, maybe it isn't the location but the amount. Maybe The Obama is trying to drive home that he wants everybody to "think big". Considering his personal record, it could be he is just embarrassed to have anybody in his administration who can't seem to blow multiple tens of millions or even hundreds of millions of dollars at the drop of a hat. That would certainly explain why he hasn't booted the secretaries of education and energy. Since their respective budgets are in the tens of billions of dollars, and we don't get anything worthwhile for it, they have indeed made the cut if ability to waste money is the criteria.
In the case of Eric Holder, I figure he keeps him around becaus...., well actually I can't figure out what use Eric Holder is; he certainly isn't doing the job of Attorney General. It's just a guess, but maybe Holder's utility to the Obama is the fact that he fills that space so Obama doesn't accidentally get an actual Attorney General in that post.
A lot of what the Justice Department is up to (not prosecuting the new black panthers, fast and furious, or even investigating Solyndra comes to mind) might be stopped, or started if there were a real Attorney General running around Washington somewhere. Then again, maybe Holder is smarter than I think he is (he'd pretty much have to be) and has used the opportunity of some of these behind the scenes deals to secure the evidence which makes him bullet proof. That would actually be funny in an ironic kind of way, but The Obama is such a skilled Machiavellian politician that I doubt it. I don't know, maybe Obama just needs somebody to run the pooper scooper behind the dog and the Secret Service won't do it.
The problem with the original statement of "legislation making things better" is twofold. First, we have already legislated so much with the goal of making things better that we have nearly destroyed the American way of life. Just as a good example we have legislated the poor black family into near non existence. Not because we made them "unpoor" but because our help to that group of people, delivered through legislation I might add, has just about destroyed the family unit which is part of what is needed to escape poverty in the first place. Our war on poverty has been an abysmal, total, humanity destroying failure, yet we just keep legislating away at it.
Secondly, the government has told us, and we've told each other, for so long that we can legislate away societal problems that a lot of us have come to believe that government can step in and save us from ourselves.
The fact of the matter is that laws are a necessary part of humans living together, but, the only way to make things "better" is to encourage people to reach within themselves and use their God given abilities to make their own way. That's what the United States used to be about, and if we want to continue to be the greatest nation on the face of the earth, we are going to have to return to that kind of life. What exactly the path of that return is, only time will tell, but one thing I am sure of, it will not be through "government regulation".
Bruce Kreitler is the author of Obamageddon (the Culmination of the Progressive Looting of America) and posts this and other articles at BruceKreitler.com.