There has been a good deal of controversy surrounding an officiating call in a recent NFL playoff game. The concern over possible bias by the referees has reached Congress where outcry for an investigation have been heard. It seems many there believe there was obvious favoritism toward one team, possibly based in the personal loyalties of a number of the officials whose home is in the same state as the apparent beneficiary. I find it interesting how those Congressmen and women can decry what they perceive as bias in the sport of football and yet fail to see their own tendencies when it comes to legislation.
As I have mentioned here numerous times, I am a proponent of a free market economy. A free market isn't necessarily one in which "bad" behavior is tolerated simply because trade is unfettered. That market must be built upon a level playing field -- an unbiased field in which the "referees" (in this case the lawmakers) insure that bad behavior is punished while good behavior is allowed to flourish.
Regulating trade is one of the very few powers assigned to government by our Constitution. The question then becomes one of establishing a set of rules which various legislative bodies have attempted to codify into law. The rules should be structured in such a way that all "players" have an equal opportunity at success -- or failure. Notice the use of the word opportunity; it is one of the foundational principles of our country as stated in the Constitutional phrase, "the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness." It includes no guarantee of success and no artificial support via "programs" for the supposed disadvantaged. It does, however, indicate the responsibility of government, as enabled by "the people," to provide a level playing field with a uniform set of rules that provide no special advantage or, disadvantage to any particular individual or, group.
Over time the level playing field has become biased in favor of certain large entities. One could argue that the bias is temporary and also a result of a free market because everyone has equal opportunity to influence lawmakers to support their cause. That isn't the case. The average citizen hasn't the financial means to make any impact on the legislative process.
The arise of various organizations through the years should have aided the "little guy" in his quest for equal representation. Theoretically, by pooling resources into a larger group such as a trade union or, national association, the voice of the average individual could be heard in a manner that would impact or, influence the process of making laws to keep the playing field level. The problem though, is that the very ogranizations originally designed to help them become predators because of the concentration of power into the hands of their management.
Ultimately, the "little guy" remains at the mercy of those who control tremendous amounts of wealth and property. Those who control that wealth acrete power by using wealth to influence the legislative process in their favor.
How can we return to a "level playing field" in which opportunity is abundant? One of the first steps would be to limit the power of "big money" to influence legislation. An additional step would be to enact term limits for legislators. A third would be to roll back onerous rules that place unaffordable burdens on the "little guy" such as requirements related to insurance, etc.
I really had no intention of being political in my post today, but my frustration with what I see in Washington causes me to devote far too much of my thought to what has gone wrong with our political and economic system. It is still, perhaps, the best in the world, but there is a growing presence of disease that will eventually destroy it.
When I think about how money influences the political process I think about the current standoff between The President and leaders of the opposition party. Maybe the solution would be for the President to appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate the possibility of ties between drug cartel money and opposition to a border wal?. Merely the threat of such a move might change a few positions. After all, perception is reality....
No comments:
Post a Comment