Serving government's customers.

One of the most obscene notions perpetuated by the Reagan legacy is that greater government regulation leads to increased corruption and waste. This mantra is part of the Ron Paul libertarian Kool-Aid® that many have drunk. Just get rid of government, and tranquility and efficiency will reign.

This has become a self-fulfilling prophesy for Republican administrations. In order to service their business constituency, they just fill government regulatory agencies with incompetent or corrupt cronies who believe that government serves no useful purpose higher than their personal gain. (See my previous post.) In short order the resulting corruption and waste proves the "truth" of bad big government. The most recent example is the scandal at the FAA over pressure from the top on inspectors to ignore aircraft maintenance violations. Having gone beyond any notion that it serves the people, the FAA refers to the airlines as its "customers." (See my previous FAA post.)

One has only to look at Europe to see the fallacy of this argument. In Germany, Switzerland, and the Scandinavian countries, businesses and banking are more regulated than in the U.S. and there is relatively little corruption. Their economies are leaving ours in the dust. The Euro, Franc, and Krona are strong in part because people have justifiable confidence in their financial markets and in the products they produce. The greatest risk facing these nations is their investments in the U.S. The British, with a more deregulated banking system, are paying the consequences.

Targeted government regulation can increase consumer safety and confidence and create a stronger economy. The extent of corruption and waste is all about the leadership voters choose to implement regulation.

Regulatory corruption and 9/11

There has been much written about how our civil liberties have been irrationally eroded after 9/11, and how burdensome air travel has become. What seems to have been forgotten is that a significant factor in 9/11 was our corrupt regulatory system. The FAA had become another federal agency largely unable to regulate because of industry lobbying. The airlines resisted pre-9/11 FAA proposals to strengthen cockpit doors, for example. Failing to require those doors be strengthened was one of nine fatal mistakes made by the government that could have prevented the tragedy, according to the 9/11 Commission.

The industry also was not following passenger screening rules, and the FAA was not holding airlines accountable for this. Some of the hijackers paid for tickets in cash at the airport just before their flights, which should have triggered additional screening. What's more, the hijackers did this several times before 9/11 as a test, and none were subjected to additional checks. If regulations had been followed, the hijackers might have been caught, since some were already on watch lists and the FBI was trying to find them.

Our safety has gotten worse, not better, since 9/11, because in the name of security, we vote for politicians who simultaneously promise more security and preach that we'd all be better off if government just left business alone. In contrast to the some of the overreaction in airline security, regulation abdication by government has made us less safe in so many other ways. For example, although we may be less likely to die in a hijacked airplane, our kids and our pets are more likely to die from tainted food or dangerous toys.