Why Government Keeps Getting Bigger in the USA

What is funny is that people keep trying to blame one or the other party in the United States as being the culprit. In fact, both are to blame, but only because they hang onto rhetoric that is decades old, and the common person is too set in his or her ways to realize what happened.

The problem started in the 1960s and is only now at its zenith of problematic proportions. Prior to the 1960s, for the most part, Republicans (or the right) were content with control over state governments. They never saw the federal government as useful, or (and this really important) prosperous. The benefits of being a member of Congress were pretty dismal back then and prior to that period. The Democrats, having solidified power in the federal government (not the presidency, as that changed constantly), started to look at their positions as something they should reward, so they did. They made Congress such an attractive place to work with all of the benefits they added, that Republicans, who were more concerned with taking care of their businesses back in the states (where the real money was for them) that they started to see that Congress might be as beneficial financially as staying home and running the state governments. So, from the 1970s on, you started to see an upswing of Republicans. The Democrats had a power base back then, but they rarely had any resistance from Republicans (aside from the territories that don't switch at all because they've always been so partisan based). Well, what kept the Democrats in power was the money they received from their union funding and general assistance PACs. Their PACs were ALWAYS willing to reward someone already in office, but rarely a challenger. The Republican PACs, however, were willing to find either an incumbent or a challenger. It doesn't take a lot of math to figure out that Republicans were going to be armed with a lot more PAC funding than Democrats, and slowly they were going to start knocking them out of federal government representative positions. This went on until the 1980s when the Republicans took back Congress. It's been wavering ever since, and has only pushed in the Democrat's position because everyone was so pissed off at the Republicans over the Iraqi War that it was bound to happen.

So, with all that information in mind, it should not be hard to see that Republicans who now see government as "good" are going to be willing to grow government, where they see it as part of their power base now, rather than something to complain about. The Democrats have always been pro-government and government growth, so that didn't take much of an impetus. So, we have two parties that NOW believe larger government is a good thing.

Those who are against big government don't have representatives anymore. There are too few members of Congress who represent them. All that is left are the ones who are from areas where they have never been challenged by anyone else, so they're still in office. But the power brokers in Congress are all about making Congress stronger and government bigger.

It's not going to change with either party, because both parties are now part of the problem and complicit in its continuation.

So, what's the answer? Well, if you want smaller government, the answer is to throw out practically everyone and put in new people who don't want larger government. The problem? Each congressional district's constituents consistently respond the same way in polls: "I like my member of Congress but think all the rest should be thrown out". Think about that one for a moment. And then realize why it will never change.

Stumble It!