Thursday, September 08, 2005

End of small government?

The other night Jeremy Paxman asked the panel if the response to Hurricane Katrina meant the era of big (see below) small government is over. It took me a few seconds to push my tongue back and close my mouth. What? Government's bureaucratically bogged down response to a major disaster is an endorsement for its greater involvement in the lives of its citizens?

Protecting the citizens is government's primary function. That means protecting the citizens from foreign enemies, home-grown criminals and, as far as possible, nature. It seems to me that the question should be, "Have we imposed so many other burdens on government that it can no longer fulfill its primary function"?

Bill Gates runs a fairly successful software company. How would he do if he were put in charge of a furniture manufacturing company? Maybe he wouldn't be so successful. Maybe he's only be good managing in the software industry. It's possible and I think many people would agree that it's possible.

So, why do we believe we can find people who can manage an organization responsible for defense, education, agriculture, parklands, etc.? Even at the state level this seems pretty much impossible, never mind at the Federal level. Isn't it time to ponder whether the era of big government is over?

UPDATE: 7:15 Sep 9 Thanks to a tip, I realize I mistakenly wrote "big" where I meant "small" in the first sentence above. Duh! That means the whole point I was trying to make was destroyed by my own mistake.