Power to the people, not the government

Why do we expect large government agencies to be effective? Todd Dorman (Gazette columnist) complains that the federal disaster recovery capability is, well, awful - wasteful, bureaucratic overlap, confusion and delay, rules changed midstream, red tape (“Country's recovery plan is a disaster,” June 16).

I presume he has been observing the federal recovery plan in action in Cedar Rapids during recent months. But then he concludes, after observing the GOP debate where candidates propose federal services as better provided by states or privatizing, that the answer is really just a better federal process, one that cuts through the bureaucracy and gets the job done.

Isn't it strange that after all of this time, we can still idealize large government as the best answer? If only they would just do things better. But that's the problem, isn't it? They are not going to do things better.

Almost always, states or private companies get it done better and quicker. They are closer to the problem, closer to the recipient.

Of course, as Dorman points out, sometimes the federal government is the only one that seems large enough. Still, it's like asking a leopard to change its spots.

Isn't it time we appreciate that the more we push responsibility closer to the people, not away to the federal government, the more likely it will work? Maybe that's the question we should be asking candidates.

Dan Steele

Iowa City