
Featured
Politics now has a dizzying quality. The roller-coaster of Trump policies―now we do this, now we do the opposite―is being matched by wild swings in the Democratic positions, led by socialist Zohran Mamdani's victory in the New York City mayoral primary. Just imagine, as liberal columnist Joe Klein mused, the staggering inefficiency of a municipal grocery store operating under union work rules: "Sorry, I only restock on Thursdays."
Centrist democrats are trying to mobilize an Abundance agenda to cut through red tape to build housing and infrastructure. That's a step in the right direction, but pruning the red tape jungle doesn't work by itself. Officials must have authority to make tradeoff judgments.
So far the Trump administration’s DOGE initiative has focused on cutting programs and terminating civil servants, not reforms to improve public performance. But there's broad public and expert opinion that government operating systems are overdue for overhaul.
This forum focused on the operational failures of the current state, and included proposals to empower common sense solutions, make government more manageable, and clarify the role of oversight by courts.
America is bogged down in red tape. This is not a secret. Common sense is nowhere, because common sense is illegal.
A brigade of worthy new books is sounding the alarm, and are summarized by David Brooks in his column this week: “We Can Achieve Great Things.” Other public intellectuals calling for a better way of governing are IT expert Jennifer Pahlka, law professor Nicholas Bagley, and political scientist Francis Fukuyama.
What's missing is a discussion of the philosophical flaw underlying the modern state.
In a report published by Manhattan Institute, Philip Howard argues that Washington needs to abandon the bureaucratic compliance model, and replace it with a simpler framework that empowers designated officials to make tradeoff judgments to modernize infrastructure and achieve public results.
Governing structures created after the 1960s are designed to fail because they presume legal rules and processes can validate correct choices. But law can't think. The proper role of law is to provide a framework that delineates the authority to make that decision, and provides public transparency and oversight.