Remember the cluster-you-know-what in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina? Corrupt and incompetent politicians in both the city and at the state level acted passively, assuming that Uncle Sam somehow should be responsible for dealing with the storm.
And we’ve seen similar behavior from other state and local politicians before, during, and after other natural disasters.
The obvious lesson to be learned is that the federal government shouldn’t have any responsibility for dealing with natural disasters. All that does it create a wasteful layer of bureaucracy, while also inculcating a sense of learned helplessness on the part of state and local officials who should be responsible for dealing with storms and other local crises.
In other words, the answer is federalism. State and local governments should be solely responsible for state and local issues.
But not just because of some abstract principle. There’s a very strong practical argument that you get more sensible decisions when the public sector is limited (as Mark Steyn humorously explained) and there is clear responsibility and accountability at various levels of government.
And this is why the biggest lesson from the scandal of tainted water in Flint, Michigan, is that local politicians and bureaucrats should not be able to shift the blame either to the state or federal government. Which was my main point in this interview.
To be sure, it is outrageous that state and federal bureaucrats knew about the problem and didn’t make it public, so I surely don’t object to officials in Lansing and Washington getting fired.
But I do object to the political finger pointing, with Democrats trying to blame the Republican Governor and Republicans trying to blame the Democratic President.
Nope, the problem is an incompetent local government that failed to fulfill a core responsibility.
The Wall Street Journal has the same perspective, opining that the mess in Flint is a failure of government.
…the real Flint story is a cascade of government failure, including the Environmental Protection Agency.
More specifically (and as I noted in the interview), we have a local government that became a fiefdom for a self-serving bureaucracy that was more concerned with its privileged status than in providing core government services.
…after decades of misrule: More than 40% of residents live in poverty; the population has fallen by half since the 1960s to about 100,000. Bloated pensions and retiree health care gobble up about 33 cents of every dollar in the general fund.
And the WSJ editorial also castigated the state and federal bureaucrats that wrote memos rather than warning citizens.
MDEQ and the EPA were chatting about Flint’s system as early as February. MDEQ said it wanted to test the water more before deciding on corrosion controls, though it isn’t clear that federal law allows this. …the region’s top EPA official, political appointee Susan Hedman, responded… “When the report has been revised and fully vetted by EPA management, the findings and recommendations will be shared with the City and MDEQ and MDEQ will be responsible for following up with the City.” She also noted over email that it’s “a preliminary draft” and it’d be “premature to draw any conclusions.” The EPA did not notify the public.
The lesson is that adding state and federal bureaucracy impedes effective and competent local government.
The broader lesson is that ladling on layers of bureaucracy doesn’t result in better oversight and safety. It sometimes lets agencies shirk responsibility for the basic public services like clean water that government is responsible for providing.
Here’s the bottom line.
Federalism is about getting better government by creating clear lines of responsibility and accountability in an environment that allows state and local governments to learn from each other on best practices.
The current system blurs responsibility and accountability, by contrast, while also imposing needless expense and bureaucracy. And we get Katrina and Flint with this dysfunctional approach.
So whether it’s Medicaid, education, transportation, welfare, or disasters, involvement from Washington makes things worse rather than better.
[…] The bottom line is you get better outcomes when there’s genuine decentralization. Simply stated, politicians have to be at least semi-responsible when they have to raise the money that they spend. It’s called accountability. […]
[…] The bottom line is you get better outcomes when there’s genuine decentralization. Simply stated, politicians have to be at least semi-responsible when they have to raise the money that they spend. It’s called accountability. […]
[…] bottom line, as I explained back in 2016 when writing about mess in Flint, is that you blur responsibility and accountability when […]
[…] bottom line, as I explained back in 2016 when writing about mess in Flint, is that you blur responsibility and accountability when multiple […]
[…] bottom line, as I explained back in 2016 when writing about mess in Flint, is that you blur responsibility and accountability when multiple […]
[…] in the context of issues such as welfare, natural disasters, transportation, coronavirus, infrastructure, and […]
[…] big fan of federalism. After all, compared to what happens when Washington screws up, there’s a lot less damage if a state or city imposes a bad […]
[…] Washington provides bailouts, you incentivize risky behavior in the private sector and “learned helplessness” from state and local […]
[…] Ms. Valentine is just warming up. Did you know that libertarians somehow are at fault for the incompetence of Flint, MI, which is governed by […]
[…] from savage dog attacks, leaving a dead body in a pool for two days, requiring permits to be a bum, poisoning water supplies, and paying bureaucrats not to work for 12 […]
[…] from savage dog attacks, leaving a dead body in a pool for two days, requiring permits to be a bum, poisoning water supplies, and paying bureaucrats not to work for 12 […]
[…] On an unrelated topic, I want to augment my observations on the water crisis in Flint, Michigan, by citing some very important analysis by Reason‘s Shikha […]
[…] On an unrelated topic, I want to augment my observations on the water crisis in Flint, Michigan, by citing some very important analysis by Reason‘s […]
[…] This is a guest post by Dan Mitchell […]
[…] is a guest post by Dan Mitchell “a high priest of light tax small state […]
federalism… term limits… visionary leadership at the state level… and a constitutional convention…
otherwise…. bye-bye miss American pie…..
http://articles.latimes.com/2005/dec/25/nation/na-levee25
=== ===
Levees Weakened as the New Orleans Board feuded with Federal Engineers
[edited] Structural inspections were cursory. Maintenance was minimal. A confusing regulatory patchwork of ownership over the levees and canals blurred the lines of authority. These shortcomings were cited by independent engineering teams analyzing the levees’ collapse.
Although the Corps of Army Engineers and federal officials kept a tight leash on funding, the Orleans board spent money lavishly, diverting resources to high-stakes investments such as casinos and marinas. The levee board’s unusual authority to hire its own consultants allowed its officials to select firms that regularly gave campaign contributions to politicians with influence over levee board business.
Critics say that the Orleans district operated its own patronage system, unchecked by repeated failures by the Louisiana Legislature to reform the levee board system.
=== ===
Katrina was a government failure at all levels before that storm hit.
Government allowed people to build in the Mississippi flood plain without warning them. New Orleans is nicknamed the Crescent City because the stable, high land is the curved riverbank of the Mississippi, surrounded by land which has regularly flooded.
This housing depended on flood control by levees (storm walls) built of reinforced concrete intended to hold back high waters.
Lousiana and New Orleans failed to inspect, repair, and re-engineer the levees around New Orleans. The funds for doing this were available, but diverted to such projects as building casinos, no doubt to the intended benefit of local politicians. The levies failed in large part because they were undermined over time and not repaired. The cost of rebuilding them was $3 billion, and no one in government wanted to pay for this. In perspective, that would have been about $10,000 per house flooded, not a huge investment to preserve 30,000 x $100,000 houses. (statistics from memory and approximate).
The Katrina catastrophe was enabled by the short-sighted negligence of local and state government. And there was no effective disaster plan for the eventual catastrophe. For example, school busses intended to provide evacuation were stored in an area which flooded, making them unavailable.
The free market plans for the future much better than does government, which plans mostly for the next election or how to distribute pension benefits. But, government advertises that it has everything under control and undermines the demand for real protection and planning.
[…] Reposted from International Liberty […]
[…] Katrina, Flint, and the Practical Case for Federalism […]