The primary role of any legitimate Government is to ensure the health, education and welfare of its people. Period. It is not saving money, not cutting taxes, and it is not inserting democracy into third world tribal cultures. Those things may be well and good, but like Maslow's hierarchy, only after the primary needs are met. In the US they're not.
In the framework of today's desire for “fiscal accountability”, the extra costs of war, coupled with the reduced Government income from tax cuts, has made many US agencies as tight fisted and cost sensitive as the leanest companies in the most competitive industries. This cross-pollination, between corporate method and Government bureaucracy, has created an environment where action (read: spending) is repressed. Attempting to use a corporate model to run a country, as the Bush administration is trying, conflicts with its responsibility.
The main reason our new and improved National Security apparatus couldn't respond when Katrina hit New Orleans is simple: there was no money. Budget problems have caused systematic financial cutbacks in health and security infrastructure since prior to the current administration. With the Bush administration that cutting became slashing. Another cause of inertia in Washington is that there was no one with authority. Certainly no one that was willing to take responsibility, especially if it meant the allocation of costly resources.
The word “resources:, in this context, is an interesting one. In corporate life one often hears, “We just don't have the resources to do the job”. And this is where the difference between corporations and government becomes clear, because the same words coming from Mike Brown, head of FEMA at the time, take on an ominous meaning. When a corporation under funds its essential functions you get employee burn out. When the Government does it, people die.
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/Hide comments
Show/Hide comment form
| < Prev |
|---|
