The
title of this book, Government by Political Spin, implies that
the officials of our government are offering us promises and solutions
that they cannot produce; but rather, they are using a public
relations approach to convince us they are very necessary, and should
be kept in power to solve problems, real and imaginary. Do you think
this is the most wonderful country in the world? I do. Do you think
the federal government can solve every one of our problems? I
certainly don't!!
We
are the oldest democratic republic on earth, based on a constitution
created by f1fty-five brilliant people meeting in Philadelphia in
1787. In one hot, unairconditioned summer they created a flexible
document that overcame the objections of thirteen individual
confederated states, allowing the most livable democracy in the world,
and the most powerful. Those men could not have anticipated the myriad
changes to come in the next two-plus centuries, but the original
instrument they crafted allows the flexibility to solve problems.
However, that flexibility is being undermined by a proactive federal
judiciary, in which federal judges are now running prisons, school
districts, and other institutions, exercising power never really
granted to them under the Constitution with accountability to no one.
The carefully balanced division of power between the three branches of
our government is gone, without stirring up a fight from the
legislative branch, in fact with their apparent acquiescence. All this
in the past thirty-five years.
What
needs to be understood is the intent of the framers of the
Constitution in each area of intended compromise in the Constitution.
Differing political philosophies were melded together, to give
satisfaction to everyone. The intents were universal and for all time.
Where we have strayed from those
intents,
we have seen the creation of an inability to solve many of our
modern problems. The compromises created a system of checks
and balances that allowed the three branches to maintain
balanced power. Attention to the strict construction of the
Constitution would have maintained the balance. There are
other changes. The Framers could not have foreseen the type of
Congress we now have. They anticipated a Congress in which the
members would offer to serve for up to six years, and return
home to manage their business or farm. They could not afford
to stay away longer; there were no professional politicians,
and the profession was not imagined. Now we have politicians
who are difficult to remove from office with the campaign
rules they have created in self-protection, and the popular
attitude they have propagandized: the federal government has a
never-ending supply of money to bring home "pork" to
each local district and money to take care of everyone who
wants or needs to be taken care of.
How
can we expect voters {remember, that's ourselves!) to vote out
of office folks who promise and bring home all those goodies?
So let's do some simple arithmetic and you will really
understand my point: Roughly three million people lived when
the Constitution was framed. There are almost 270 million
citizens now, ninety times more; 90 x 55= 4,950 brilliant
political theorists who should exist in our country, if our
population is equivalent to that of 1787 {and we probably
are). They should be in Washington creating the latest
miracles to solve our current problems, but where are they?
Those brilliant people have to be somewhere. There are a few
in Washington, but the majority are in business, the
professions, and other endeavors. They are very cynical about
the current political processes in Washington, but read the
books they write, the letters to the editor, the columns in
the newspapers-the ideas are out there.
But
they are not in Washington. We have an overwhelming need to
get founding-father-like people to Washington, people who are
more concerned with the future of the country than how to get
reelected in two or six years. Ideally we can vote out the
present congressional members, but that is like "taking
candy from a baby." They have convinced us we can
"have
our cake and eat it too." WE CAN'T!! We must
demand to change the system, remove the cynicism, and
attract to our federal government a more idealistic
quality of representation from people who intend to
stay just a few years, and make a valuable
contribution before leaving.
T
o find answers to the way we voters think and act, we
need to look to our evolutionary past. Our founders
developed an extraordinarily ideal form of
representative democracy. They anticipated our
representatives would be statesmanlike and the voters
who elected them educated and informed. With the
unanticipated appearance of career politicians
spinning their PR, statesmanship and a well-informed
electorate have both largely disappeared. The
psychology we have brought with us from our recent
hunter-gatherer (read savage) past creates a major
part of the problem. We have suddenly entered a
complicated civilized world in a brief moment in time,
when com- pared to the hundreds of thousands of years
of evolution it took to get us to this stage. Our
motives for voting the way we do, and the motives of
the members of Congress all arise from the same
evolutionary psychology. We are all the same under the
skin, no better or worse than our governmental
representatives.
Ever
since the New Deal in the 1930s the federal government
has attempted to step in and solve all our problems,
local and national. It started with national concerns,
but gradually, using the commerce clause in the
Constitution through the courts, the Feds began to
dictate events at the county and city level, damaging
the protections for the States purposely put into the
Tenth Amendment, which specifically left to the States
all powers not enumerated in the Constitution as being
awarded to the federal government. Notwithstanding the
impossibility of it all, Washington rhetoric tells us
that all problems can be solved and perfection
guaranteed, if enough money is thrown at each problem.
But 10 and behold, studies now show that although
there have been some advances in improving some
problems, in general the trends reach a plateau, and
even if more and more funds are expended stagnation
continues. Trillions have been spent during the
thirty-plus years since the
"Great
Society" of L.B.]., and finally we are
trying a new approach to one aspect-the
welfare program.
Naturally,
the result of a central Washington control
has been a growth of a huge bureaucracy, a
group of people consumed with their own
self-importance, dedicated to growing larger
in numbers, and acting as
"experts" to convince Congress
that further growth is the
"solution" to all problems. The
same psychological mechanisms that makes
voters vote as they do, makes Congress
members act as they do, and drive
bureaucrats to try and grow bureaucracies as
they do-we all have the same software in our
brains.
Along
the way we citizens have forgotten one
important fact: everyone working in
Washington in the government, whether
congressional members, their staffs, or
bureaucrats, are our employees. But we have
let ourselves be seduced by their guarantees
of a perfect birth, a perfect life, and
finally a perfect death. With Medicare,
Grandpa dies sterilely and un- noticed in
the back room of an intensive care unit, and
his grandchildren don't know that death
exists at all!! We hired these people to
represent us, not to seduce us. What has
been the result? As of 1998 five and a half
trillion dollars of national debt exists,
and they are trying to tell us the budget is
balanced by using smoke-and-mirrors
accounting, when in fact unfunded future
government obligations are rising! After
sixty-plus years of social experimentation
we are beginning to allow ourselves to
notice that it is not working as well as
they claim, and the perfection, guaranteed
by the Feds, is just pie in the sky.
This
book is an attempt to explain why we all act
from the same motivations, why we must
understand this to change our perceptions of
this country, to understand how our country
currently works, and how it can work in a
much better way. we must remember that
except for Native Americans, we all came
from somewhere else. We came {and by this I
mean for most of us, our ancestors) and took
a raw wilderness, granted with wonderful
resources, and made it into the richest and
most powerful nation that has ever existed.
Other countries have the resources, but they
never became as powerful, rich, or as
democratic. Why did we do it? I have a
theory.
And
finally, an important reminder. We are one
population
with
many different subcultural
backgrounds. We are only as strong
and as safe as our country is. We
are only as strong as the sum of
all of us. Any group that cannot
advance, for whatever reason,
weakens all of us in that we are
stronger if we are all together.
That group must be helped. Even if
current policies have not worked,
or have not been completely
successful, we must not stop
trying. As a population we present
two opposite aspects: we are the
most kind-hearted and charitable
people in the world, and yet the
most selfish. Our national debt is
creating an enormous mortgage on
the future that our grandchildren
will have to face, while currently
giving us the highest standard of
living on Earth. How fair is that?
We are but four-plus percent of
the world's population, going into
debt each year to use forty
percent of each year's available
resources. We must understand what
we are the most privileged of
people through the country we have
created, and we are sending it
into decline if not disaster. We
are the ones doing this, not the
governing folks in Washington,
because they are our employees:
they are only doing what we want,
what we have allowed them to do,
whether we realize it or not. We
need to understand ourselves, and
to see that we are allowing them
to fool us.
If
you disagree with me, yes, I am
attempting to change your mind.
But I am also attempting to make
you think. To understand any
problem in society, you must study
what the other side is presenting
as reasons behind their solutions.
Study opposing views, research the
approaches on both sides, try to
remove the emotion within
yourself, difficult as that may
be, and be independent in your
thinking. Forget what your family
taught you in childhood. It is not
sacrosanct. Use Occam's razor in
your deductive reasoning. Sir
William of Occam, about 1330,
stated the following: "If you
can conceive of a simple solution
to a puzzle or problem by being
able to put all, or almost all,
the related factors into one
logical basket, your conclusion
will be correct 90% of the
time." I used this method
with great success reaching
diagnoses in my medical practice.
Think
about another rule I follow: If a
series of events seems ludicrous,
they have probably been planned
purposely, and perhaps with the
intent of fooling you. Look for
logic.
And
one last rule I have
found very valuable: If
you discover a
philosophic principle
that appeals to you and
makes you consider
living by it or using it
to understand life or
the positions of others,
try carrying it to
logical extremes in all
directions. If it works
at the extreme, that
tends to prove its
validity for you. Look
for logic. Read the
book, think, and
challenge my reasoning.
I look forward to the
debate.
|
|
|
|
|
|