75-08-B5
- Main Page \ Reagan Radio Commentaries \ 1975
| << Previous Broadcast | Next Broadcast >> |
Government: Big vs. Small # 1
TranscriptWhen it comes to government, is bigger necessarily better? I'll be right back. One of the most frustrating feelings for the average man is that of helplessness as he attempts to deal with government that seems ever to grow bigger and more centralized. He watches in near helplessness as big brother determines more and more what's best for him and at the same time grows more distant. The average citizen throws up his hands in dismay whenever he contemplates the possibility of having to deal with the federal government, the state government or even the governments of most large cities. The saying that, "You can't fight City Hall" is usually an understatement. Most of the time you can't even find who it is in city hall you want to fight. Bigness in itself is no sin but nevertheless in this country we've always tried to see that nothing got so big it became unmanageable. For that reason we have antitrust laws aimed at keeping business in business and industry from becoming all-encompassing. Unfortunately, on another front, organized labor, we've done nothing to stop unions from getting so big and so powerful they become the masters rather than the servants of their members and often pose a threat to the stability of our entire economy. And on still another front, government, we voted into office year after year legislators and executives who push for bigger more powerful government and more and more centralized authority all in the name of doing what is best for the people. So while we don't like it we must admit that much of the fault is our own. We've complained about big government but then we've voted for it. One reason probably is that many voters have fallen for the old line that small government, is ineffective is unable to deal with our problems, is inefficient and is expensive. We've been told that only big government with its accompanying high salaries attracts competent managers and honest legislators. Well don't you believe it. One of the things we did in California in 1973 was to put to work a task force to study the possibility of local government reform to see if in fact we could get better and more responsive government by consolidating some of our very small units of government. We had seen a 1966 study by the Committee for Economic Development which in brief advocated fewer and larger governments reduction of duplication and overlap and provision of one visible center of authority. And on the surface that look pretty good. If by consolidating governments you can make a government more effective and more responsive to the citizens needs then that's the way to go, but our task force refused to take that 1966 study as gospel. Instead it began his study from scratch and after nearly a year's work this is what it found. I quote, "A system of highly flexible and independent local government units is as capable or more capable of providing the quality of service that people expect than is a centralized and consolidated government system." Unquote. It goes on to say that consolidation of local governments would actually produce a system less likely to provide public services of equality and at a cost that suit the diverse preferences of the average citizen. In other words bigger when it comes to government isn't necessarily better or cheaper. The next time someone tells you that consolidated government or regional government is the only way to go, just remember that song from Porgy and Bess, "It Ain't Necessarily So." This is Ronald Reagan. Thanks for listening. |
Details
| |||||||||||
Added Notes |
