Adult game of kicking the can

Rick Morain

. . . faith without works is dead . . .”

—James 2:26

Many officeholders strongly advocate openness in government. Let all unclassified information out, and good things will happen.

That’s a good idea, as far as it goes. But openness alone, even coupled with advocacy proposals, falls short of progress. To close the circle requires actual action.

One tried-and-true way to avoid taking action is to call for a study, often performed by a study committee. You know the drill. A legislative body, or a chief executive, fears voter revenge from a law that the state or nation needs but that voters are likely to oppose.

I don’t mean that studies are always unnecessary. For some problems, a study may be the only way to move forward on a legislative necessity, usually with bipartisan input and with compromise.

But when one party controls all the levers of government, and that party wants to remain ascendant, a study with no follow-up is a common way to sidestep the issue, or to postpone it for another day.

Tax increases are an example. So are environmental protections. So is elimination of a program that no longer serves a purpose but in which a powerful lobby is strongly invested.

I salute local government bodies here in Greene County for avoiding the study committee subterfuge. I can’t recall an instance when the Jefferson City Council, Greene County Board of Education or Greene County Board of Supervisors shunted a decision off to an appointed study committee rather than making a decision and carrying it out.

Of course, when government is close to the people, it is difficult to hide the responsibility. The buck stops at the local governing body’s door, and that’s traditionally where the action happens when the situation is local.

That doesn’t mean the pending decision for action is necessarily evident or easy. My observation of our local government bodies is that they make the hard decisions regardless of the political consequences, and then follow through. The board decisions are not always unanimous, but they don’t result in much resentment or hard feeling among the board members. That’s the way it should be.

State and federal government bodies are another matter. Local governments in Iowa don’t have much to say about taxes, other than whether a local sales and service tax of one penny is to be collected. But state government decides who pays state taxes, what is taxed and for how much. That means someone is going to object no matter what tax mix is enacted.

So tax studies are a tempting way to avoid actually taking action.

Another example on the state level: water quality. In 2013 the Iowa Legislature officially adopted the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy, with a target of reducing the nitrogen and phosphorous content in the state’s rivers and streams by 45%.

It’s a laudable goal. But after 13 years, we’re not very far along at all on pollution reduction. As everyone knows, that’s because the strategy, although prepared after extensive study and analysis by specialists at Iowa State University and elsewhere, included no enforcement mechanism. No one must do what the study calls for — it’s all voluntary.

Consequently, the water works in Des Moines runs its nitrogen removal equipment for a record number of days this year, and Iowa water continues to feed the Dead Zone at the mouth of the Mississippi River off Louisiana.

Regardless of the righteousness of the Nutrient Reduction Strategy, it’s evident by now that it’s essentially useless unless it gets some teeth.

At the federal level, the best example of “faith without works” is probably the ticking clock on Social Security and Medicare.

The latest projection for the financial exhaustion of Social Security payouts at their current level is 2032. That’s just six years from now. A big bunch of people will take a financial hit at that point unless Congress and the President do something about it.

But no one wants to touch it. Social Security is the feared third rail of American politics. The universal belief is that whoever increases Social Security taxes or reduces payments will be beaten at the polls in the next election.

Time marches on, however, and the problem has been all too evident for decades. So the hackneyed answer? Appoint a committee to study the problem and kick it down the road till next time.

In 2010 President Obama appointed an 18-member commission to design a bipartisan recommendation to curtail the burgeoning federal deficit, including putting Social Security on a sustainable path. The 18-member Simpson-Bowles Commission was politically balanced with members experienced in government budgeting.

After more than seven months the commission completed its recommendations, replete with proposals for both increasing revenues and cutting spending. The Social Security section was similar, with both reduced outflows and increased revenues.

The commission’s rules required approval of the final report by 14 of its 18 members. Only 11 members ended up voting for it: five Republicans, five Democrats, and one Independent. Four Democrats and three Republicans said no. So the report did not go to Congress for consideration.

Lawmakers today appear as far as ever from taking the proverbial bull by its horn. As 2032 grows closer, hope abounds that Congress will feel forced to do something. If it doesn’t, Social Security benefits will have to be cut by an estimated 17% in order to keep the fund solvent.

Kicking the can is a kids game. Responsible governing is for adults. We need much more of the latter.

Rick Morain is a reporter and columnist with the Jefferson Herald.