The government of our country has become increasingly incompetent, corrupt, and dysfunctional. Although Barack Obama has certainly hastened our government's slide toward mediocrity, the problems didn't begin with him, nor are they likely to end on the very happy day when he leaves office.
Moreover, many of the issues that prevent our government from operating at even the sub-optimal quasi-effectiveness of the Feds at their best are very difficult to solve. Still, until you identify the problems, it's difficult to come up with the solutions. So, let's talk about some of the reasons why government in this country no longer works for the benefit of the American people.
Earmarks: When earmarks first became a hot issue during the Bush years, I have to admit that I was one of the people who shrugged my shoulders and said something like, "Sure, that's something we should work on, but is it really all that important compared to the money we spend on entitlement programs?"
Let me tell you why I was wrong: Earmarks have become a means of legalized bribery. We get all upset about politicians who are tied in any way, shape, or form to Jack Abramoff -- but what Abramoff did goes on every day of the week. Where Abramoff blew it was by explicitly saying, "I'll get you this much money and you'll do this for me." Yet, lobbyists do the exact same thing all the time, but they just don't say it out loud. They give money to congressmen and expect to get earmarks in return. They do, in fact, get the earmarks they paid for --and it's perfectly legal.
Keep in mind that although you can find earmarks stretching way back until the earliest days of the country, using them as a form of congressional payola is relatively new. Just to give you one example, courtesy of Americans for Prosperity:
Taxpayers for Common Sense calculated that the 1970 Defense Appropriations Bill had a dozen earmarks; the 1980 bill had 62 earmarks; and by 2005, the defense bill had skyrocketed to 2,671 earmarks.
As earmarks have proliferated, Abramoff-style government has gone from being the exception to the rule in Congress.
Political Polarization Unprecedented Since The Civil War: One of the most remarkable things you'll notice when you read about politics in say, the late 1800s, is that despite the fact that both parties fought like cats and dogs, they also had a very similar approach to governance. Setting aside a handful of differences on things like tariffs, both parties agreed on the overwhelming majority of issues. Even in this country 40-50 years ago, the parties were much more similar than they are today. John F. Kennedy is an overrated Democratic President, but he was serious about defending America, he was an ardent anti-Communist, he believed in tax cuts -- and on social issues, like most Democrats of his day, he'd have far more in common with Jim DeMint than he would with Democrats like Barney Frank. On the other hand, look at Richard Nixon, the man Kennedy defeated in 1960. Nixon was a left-of-center, pro-choice Republican who pushed price controls, tax increases, and created the EPA. So, whether voters chose a man like Kennedy or Nixon, they still weren't usually getting too far from the center.
However, after the radical left wing completely took over the Democratic Party in the late sixties, the Dems became completely dominated by liberals. On the other side, Reagan's election and success managed to shift the Republican Party to the right, although regrettably, not as far as the Dems went left. In other words, the average Democrat in Congress now has more in common ideologically with Trotsky and Lenin than he does Washington and Jefferson. Meanwhile, Republicans idealize Reagan, who opposed everything the liberal left stands for. When both parties start that far apart, it's hard to work together on almost any issue.A Far Left Wing Media: For a long time, the mainstream media in this country could fairly be classified as center-left. However, over time it has drifted from center-left to far-left and it has affected the way our politicians behave.
Politicians on the Right know they can't get a fair shake from the media; so they tend to be overly cautious, even though the populace leans to the Right. On the other hand, politicians on the Left have been emboldened by the unwavering support of the media. Liberal politicians know that their every act will be cast in the most favorable light, their lies will be ignored, and their political enemies will be smeared at every turn.
Happily, this has not gone unnoticed by the public and it's had consequences. The mainstream media's credibility has cratered, it’s losing marketshare to the alternative media, and many of these left-wing propaganda outlets masquerading as newspapers are going out of business. Every time one of these liberal mainstream media reporters loses his job, this country becomes a little better place.
The Permanent Campaign: Over time, as politics has become more professionalized, interest groups have become more powerful, YouTube and the blogosphere have begun capturing every detail, and a 24 hour news cycle has become the norm, political campaigns have ceased to end.
When every vote, every quip, and every campaign stop is going to be noticed, catalogued, and may turn up in your opponent’s campaign commercial or infuriate a group you'll be counting on come election time, the latitude politicians have is severely curtailed.
If you're a Republican, are you going to cross the NRA? The Club for Growth? The Christian Coalition? If you're liberal, are you going to tell Planned Parenthood to shove it on a big issue? How about the SEIU? What about MoveOn? On every issue, in every situation, most politicians in both parties have very little room to maneuver outside whatever the party line happens to be.
Politics As A Profession: As America has become more polarized, the advantages of incumbency have become more pronounced, and gerrymandering has become more prevalent, politics has become a lifetime job for many members of Congress. In large swathes of the country, if you get elected once, don't get caught with any bribe money in your freezer, and adhere to the party line, you will be in Congress until your aides are dragging you in off your deathbed to vote for a pig farm earmark for your district. The problem with that is simple: A lot of these career politicians in Congress no longer have to pay any attention to the other side, their own constituents, or to anyone other than extremist interest groups who could potentially back a primary challenger. That's not good for this country.
Once senators no longer had to answer to state legislatures, they were incentivized to concentrate more power in their own hands, in D.C. Despite the fact that there are still a few people on the "repeal the 17th Amendment" bandwagon, that horse has long since left the barn and isn't likely to be coaxed back inside.
The Tenth Amendment Doesn't Exist In The Real World: Our Founding Fathers would be shocked and appalled by the way we openly disregard our Constitution. Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution clearly limits the powers of Congress and the 10th Amendment reads,
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Since that's the case, how is it that our government has gone so out of control that the health care legislation that was just passed actually requires people to buy health insurance as a condition of citizenship? How long and hard do you have to torture the plain language of the Constitution to conclude that Congress can force you to buy any product it so desires: health care, condos from Nancy Pelosi, union cars, Barack Obama's biography or anything else it wants?
Why do you think we so seldom pass constitutional amendments any more? In all honesty, it's because Congress and even many of the judges in our court system pay so little attention to the Constitution that they just do anything they want. That's the biggest reason why our government does so many things slowly, stupidly, and inefficiently: it's because our system of government was supposed to preclude the government from doing those things in the first place.