A proposal to stimulate accountability
Accountability. The Russonello Washington political dictionary defines it as: an overused term that means requiring those you oppose to do something they do not want to do. In reality, Websters defines it as: “the state of being accountable…. Subject to being answerable to something.”
We are hearing a great deal now about making sure the government is accountable for the funds it will spend in the President’s economic stimulus package. The Republicans argue that the stimulus package spending on building bridges and roads, modernizing energy plants, and allowing state governments to keep employees in their jobs teaching children and caring for the elderly lacks accountability because government programs are by definition wasteful. The Republicans’ idea of accountable is more tax cuts. Yes, they actually argue that giving people more money in their pockets, no strings attached, is the essence of accountability. Well, I know my brother would take the money and go directly to the Off Track Betting office in Manhattan and my cousin Jimmy would buy more movies on cable. Brilliant use of federal dollars.
It has taken 25 years for Americans to begin to realize the folly of this Ronald Reagan-inspired doctrine that individual selfishness will produce an overall positive result for the nation. That is why House minority leader John Boehner’s comments this week about the virtues of tax cuts have struck so many people as out of step with reality.
If Boehner wants a real proposal on accountability try this: If you are a member of the House of Representatives and you do not vote to fund a particular program – Head Start, roads and bridges, libraries, meals on wheels for seniors, job training, etc –your district will not receive any of the money for the program.
If you want to make government more accountable, then how can you defend voting against a program and then willingly accept the money? Not only do Members of Congress accept the money they voted against, they put out press releases claiming credit for the programs they voted against.
I first proposed this to my boss, Congressman Peter Rodino in 1981 when Reagan was cutting programs and Democrats were following like myrmidons. He grunted at his 20-something press secretary and that was the end of it. But this is an idea that is needed now more than ever. Call it tough love.
It would at least bring some accountability to the word accountability.
January 27th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Great post. I will read your posts frequently. Added you to the RSS reader.
January 27th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
Excellent post. Humorous idea. However, would the author also propose citizens not having to pay taxes for programs that one does not support? If the Republicans had the smarts simply to focus on supporting those programs that produce long-term public assets of value (e.g., roads, schools, broadband, electric grid), they might actually find a broader swath of the electorate willing to listen. Meanwhile, the drip-drip-drip of trickle down simply keeps people up at night and insomnia makes people ornery.