Is it possible that no entity is capable of sufficiently fulfilling the demands we’ve placed on the US government? A fact- and figure-free essay of inquiry.
—
Part One:
(In which I endeavor to frame the question. Part Two will entail research follow up, e.g.: fact- and figure-full.):
I’m looking out my window here, watching I95 rush hour traffic headed northbound zip by rather speedily, while the occasional train shoots past in the distance, and the free people mover ambles by more regularly.
Just out this one, small window frame exists an extraordinary amount of government involvement. Everything from traffic commissioners to train mechanics and engineers, bridge maintenance, zoning regulations. I didn’t even mention the constant drone of airplanes, departing and arriving, at the nearby international hub.
That’s just transportation, and a tiny sector of the department at that. And then you have the military, education, health care, social security. Immigration, unemployment, the VA (Veterans Affairs). The CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). The IRS (‘nuf said).
The list goes on. And on. And on. I’m fully exhausted just thinking about it.
How is one entity supposed to handle all this?
And when we judge whether or not a president, or a political party, is adept at managing the colossus of America, is it actually fair to rate it based on the performance of all these multifold and unique departments?
Not that I think we should necessarily hand the responsibility off to the private sector. There’s plenty of incompetence to go around, in both independently run business models and government run agencies.
But I wonder if we are being entirely fair by demanding that each administration be absolutely flawless in all categories.
That seems an impossible feat.
Maybe we should be more particular in how we apportion the value of these agencies. Perhaps national defense and education should be the top two issues. Or health care and social security. Or whatever.
But it would seem that if we could home in on the few areas where we will not abide failure, then it would free us (and politicians) from the constant noise of this or that governmental breakdown. Side note: there is no easy or fair way to choose. And maybe therein lies the fatal flaw of even asking this question. For even if the government is indeed incapable of fulfilling all the demands it must, there is no answer for which responsibilities we can let go.
And yet, and yet. Call me a cynic, but the idea that everything in a country as massive, interconnected, mobile, and innovative as the United States could run smoothly 24/7 seems laughable on its face.
Especially when a solitary, massive (positively gargantuan), institution is somehow responsible for all of it.
Photo: Flickr/glenngould
