Money and politics are inexorably linked. Much of America’s economic prowess can be attributed to the relative stability of its political system. Reliable processes steeped in the rule of law have served as a capital magnet, attracting investment from all reaches of the globe. The division of powers, both between branches of the federal government as well as between the differing layers of government, i.e. Federal, State, and Local, so unique to the United States, has ensured the graduality of systemic change, and in turn, the reliability of, and international faith in, our domestic capital markets. Historically, catalysts for governmental change have come either during periods of societal discord, as with the Civil Rights Movement and the Great Depression, or in times during which the “American way of life” was threatened, as occurred on September 11, 2001. The studious recognize that these changes universally add to the scope of the federal government, often to the detriment of the “general welfare”. Unfortunately, calls to “do something” cannot be ignored by those in political office whose livelihoods and continued positions of power are dependent upon the façade of “working for the people.”
Many social scientists herald FDR’s “New Deal” and LBJ’s “Great Society” as wonderful programs, if too narrow in scope. And while programs such as Social Security and Medicare indeed help secure the financial well being of the aged and infirm, they do so at the expense of personal responsibility and the right to self-determination. Moreover, claims that the New Deal helped the U.S. economy recover from the Great Depression ignore basic tenets of economic thought. Historians of all stripes have been forced to acknowledge that governmental interference in otherwise relatively efficient markets served only to stymie private capital investment and prolong an unenviable period in U.S. economic history. Given this polemic, it must be acknowledged that political populism was rampant during the 1930s. Roosevelt’s New Deal was mild in comparison to the outright communism proposed by the likes of Senator and Former Louisiana Governor Huey Long, as well as Father Charles Coughlin, a radio personality and social critic who, according to the Social Security Administration, “ …was, arguably, one of the most influential men in America.” Strangely, FDR largely saved U.S. capitalism from the ravages of communism by inadvertently prolonging the Great Depression with the introduction of socialist programs. Again, calls to “do something” cannot be ignored, even if the act is injurious to those who seek assistance.
In late October 2001, the call to “do something” to ensure the safety of U.S. citizens after the September 11th attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon could no longer go unheeded. With the support of 98 U.S. senators, the USA Patriot Act became law, much to the consternation of civil libertarians, supporters of due process, and defenders of constitutional limits to authority. Understandably, given the scope and destruction of the terrorist act on 9/11, calls to “do something” continued. In further response, 90 senators, upon the urging of President Bush, created the Department of Homeland Security, the largest restructuring of the U.S. government since the Department of Defense was created 50 years prior. Unfortunately, the effects of this restructuring were largely unknown until Hurricane Katrina struck the gulf coast. You see, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) now falls under the auspices of the relatively new Department of Homeland Security (ironically, the FBI and CIA, the 2 organizations most responsible for gathering the intelligence necessary for homeland security, do not), with cabinet secretary Michael Chertoff answerable directly to the President. Granted, local, state, and federal officials will share responsibility for the seemingly slow response to this horrific natural catastrophe, as well they should, but no reasonable person can discount the impact of bureaucracy on expediency. The Homeland Security Act of 2002, to quote the verbiage used on the website www.whitehouse.gov, “…consolidates 22 agencies and 180,000 employees”, thus creating yet another slow-moving, governmental behemoth.
The cries to “do something” have begun again, this time to get to the bottom of what went wrong. Perhaps someday the U.S. populace will recognize the value of the demand to “undo something.”
Search
