March 29, 2024
BANGOR DAILY NEWS (BANGOR, MAINE

Face of America’s government

“Americans fool themselves when they think they can strengthen democracy by weakening government. They correctly see the danger in an administrative state preempting democratic decision-making, and overburdened courts that cannot solve all the problems they are asked to deal with.” — Robert Bellah, et al., “The Good Society”

ITEM: The Environmental Protection Agency recently required AMOCO’s Yorktown, Va., oil refinery plan to install a $41 million system to capture benzene emissions. When the EPA and AMOCO took the unprecedented step of sitting down and discussing their mutual concerns they discovered that AMOCO could capture five times the amount of pollution for $11 million. However, because of inflexible laws and the lack of authority for EPA officials to negotiate, reach consensus, and tailor a pollution reduction plan, 1.6 million pouinds of pollutants continue to be released in the air and AMOCO still had to spend the $41 million even though both AMOCO and the EPA acknowledge they could reduce more pollution for fewer dollars. This is not an intelligent way to govern a nation. (Source: Wall Street Journal, March 29, 1993, page A1.)

We have become too dependent upon “command and control” (C&C) regulations as the favored tool of public policy. C&C policies are often economically inefficient, fail to address the central problem, and cause unintended negative side effects. Situations like the one involving the EPA and AMOCO shed light on why many people engaged in business resent C&C policies. They feel that the regulations are created by people who don’t understand the practical workings of their business and impose solutions that are needlessly expensive. Is it any wonder that some people see these inequities and knee-jerk a response by calling for “less government”?

Government has a place in our lives. It exists to remedy the social and economic failures that exist in our free market society. We need to refine the way our government performs its role in our daily lives so that it is less dependent upon regulatory agencies and the judiciary to solve all of our problems. Let’s try a different, culturally compatible, efficient, and intelligent approach to public policies.

We celebrate individual rights and have historical roots in throwing off the yoke of an oppressive colonial ruler. Our government was not established to work as a strong centralized body. Acknowledging our grudging dependence upon government would lead us to create incentives that allow individuals, acting in their own rational self-interest, to also act in the public interest. We can still celebrate individual rights and our own inextrible dependency upon each other. We are a nation — a community — that shares a common interest in freedom and individual empowerment. Lest our public policy solutions mirror the face of our heritage and for the freedoms we all believe in.

Some command and control policies are unavoidable. For example: You cannot yell fire in a crowded movie theater. They have a place in our lives and are sometimes the only means for ensuring public health and safety. However, our propensity to fall back on these C&C policies whenever there is an issue for our elected representatives to address is distressing. Private interest and public interest are not always mutually exclusive. The bottle bill is a small example of a solution for tying a private good to a public good. When I see a bottle on the side of the road I see a nickel and I also see people picking up these nickels because it in their own self-interest to do so. Someone gets a nickel (private good) and the public gets clean roadsides (public good).

Today in Maine we have examples of regulatory control that present opportunities for us to create more innovative public policies. Example: The International Paper Co. mill in Jay has recently worked with the Department of Environmental Protection to reduce water pollution. By working together IP and DEP reduced the level of effluents well below the regulatory allowance. Let me suggest that IP be allowed to trade-sell their emission credits to other mills on the river. The amount of effluent initially would be the same as is currently regulated but now places profit motive in pollution abatement. This moves pollution abatement from the expense column to the revenue column. Suddenly, the genius of American free enterprise is working toward pollution abatement — because one can make money doing so — and doing so willingly and of one’s own free will. What a change from being beaten over the head and shoulders by government. If this sounds far-fetched, this same principle is already in effect with tradeable So2 emission permits among utility companies.

The Northern Forest Lands Council has recently suggested fiscal incentives that tie in a private good with a public good. Why shouldn’t we reward good land stewardship by private individuals and private enterprise? Let’s explore ways to create positive incentives for “patient” capital so that the current impetus for the harvesting of natural resources is slowed to sustainable levels. We can attend to both public needs and private needs if we have the will and creativity to do so. We have been led to believe that the only way to govern well is to create regulations that have become complex to most of us and burdensome to our economy. Let us not allow ourselves to be frustrated by the maze of governmental regulations created to address society’s issues and manipulated by those that create them. There are more intelligent and efficient ways to govern that respect the rule of law, address the need for an efficient and sustainable economy, and respect the personal freedoms that have made American a land of hope and opportunity.

The first tool out of our public policy tool bag shouldn’t be a sledge hammer when a screwdriver is called for. We should look first for market-based solutions and when all else fails then look to a regulatory solution. We should see the need to use a regulatory solution as a failure for not being creative enough to find a more intelligent solution. Initiatives that engage a consensual form of problem solving acknowledges that consensus strengthens our sense of community and creates a sense of “ownership” of the solution by all parties. The consensus process and market-based solutions may not work in all cases, but it is time we looked to put democracy, creativity, and personal initiative back into our public policies are opposed to our overdependence upon the judiciary and regulators to address our social issues.

Ship Bright is the deputy commissioner of the Maine Department of Conservation.


Have feedback? Want to know more? Send us ideas for follow-up stories.

comments for this post are closed

You may also like