Hardheaded panel needed to weed government chaff
Kennebec Journal editorial: November 13, 2007.
"Change is always difficult and frequently painful. In the short run, human institutions tend to avoid pain and defer difficulties."
Those were the words of Anthony Principi as he presented the final report of the federal Base Closure and Realignment Commission to Congress in 2005. Known as BRAC, the group was one of the most successful enterprises in federal cost-cutting in recent history, tackling the near-impossible: closing down military bases that had been boons to local economies from coast-to-coast.
His comment about change and the instinct of organizations to resist could well have been said about Maine and its institutions of government.
Maine faces a challenge analogous to what the Department of Defense faced. The department had too many bases, too much duplication, too much of doing things the old -- and the expensive -- way. Figuring out what to do about that was hard, but possible. But getting the institutions that wanted to avoid pain to accept what had to be done seemed impossible.
The history of base-closing proposals was that even the most rational case that would benefit the greater public interest was undone by provincial interests. A district's congressman or a state's senator simply could not be seen to allow a base closure: too many jobs and too many contracts were at stake.
BRAC was a way around that conundrum.
Congress agreed that this independent commission would study defense department recommendations for base closings and consolidations, but come up with its own plan. Then Congress had one vote: accept the full plan or reject it. No amendments, no horse-trading. Either go down as voting for what was a smart, but painful, plan, or vote the other way and take your lumps.
It worked. Here in Maine, BRAC overruled the defense department and kept open the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Kittery, but closed the Naval Air Station in Brunswick, for example. Even most partisan observers agreed that made sense.
Now, to the present: In Maine, government needs to reduce itself -- or have it done by the taxpayers.
Tuesday's election seemed to send more signals -- if any more were needed -- that Mainers want spending and taxes reduced. Voters in Augusta and Winthrop voted down bonds for new buildings, and statewide voters only narrowly approved bonds to invest in higher education and research and development.
Meanwhile, signatures are being gathered for another tax-limitation referendum like the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) that failed last time around.
Instead of the mess a TABOR bill would bring us, we need an independent commission to determine what can be cut and where and the Legislature must give that list an up or down vote.
This was a key recommendation of "Charting Maine's Future," the 2006 report written by the Brookings Institute and funded by GrowSmart Maine.
The report recommends: "Create and empower a Maine Government Efficiency Commission to methodically review the structure and operations of state government to propose specific reforms to eliminate duplication and inefficiency. Those recommendations would be subject to a single up-or-down vote by the Legislature."
So far, this hasn't happened.
Some business groups are coalescing right now to push the idea with the Legislature. Great -- but be realistic: The Legislature isn't going to do this. They're the type of group Principi says wants to avoid pain. They're why this idea hasn't gotten traction yet.
The best chance of getting this Maine version of BRAC off the ground lies with Gov. John Baldacci. He's the only one in state government who has shown (as opposed to talked about) an interest in painful change.
But there are limits to the governor's political capital and power to make that change -- even the great consolidator will need a BRAC-type commission to pull off massive government cost reductions. He should be approached by business groups and other interested parties and told they'll stand behind him if he takes this bold step.
|
