"Is the Country Still Here?"

It is reported that President Calvin Coolidge took a nap each afternoon, even slipping into his midday PJs, while still getting ten hours of sleep each night.  Once, he upon wakening from one of those naps, he groggily asked, "Is the country still here?"  Assured that it was, did he roll over and snatch a few more zzzzzz?

Funny as that seems, it has been used as fodder by historians (who know better than others; just ask them) to rate Coolidge far down the list of "best Presidents."  I've seen him ranked as "low average" to "below average."  Candidly, I have an affinity for Cool Cal.  We are Amherst College mates, although he was a few years (?) ahead of me.  I think he was a far better President than credited.  I won't make my case here (perhaps in a later post), but two fairly recent biographies can do that for me.  Although some readers don't care for Amity Shales' writing style, I found her book to be very enlightening, especially regarding Coolidge's economic/fiscal philosophies.

But to return to my point, "Is the country still here?"  It was.  And it still is.  There is a valuable lesson there, if only we will heed it.  The country is still here.

We don't need these "imperial Presidents."  We'll get along just fine without them.  Of course, most of the Presidents from Franklin Roosevelt to the present would surely disagree.  They, no doubt, think the country couldn't do without them. 

We don't need this "Big Government."  It is pervasive and continues to grow to the detriment of the American people.  Last weekend there was an article about a local government that foreclosed on a citizen's rental property over a tax bill of $6.00, that's six dollars, that hadn't been paid.  The county then old the house for $24,000.  An op-ed urged the outgoing governor of Michigan to issue pardons to some men convicted and sentence to long years in prison although the evidence hardly warranted even a guilty finding.  Prosecutors overzealously pushed for convictions, distorted or hiding exculpatory evidence. 

Let's look at it another way.  Federal regulatory agencies in 2016 issued almost 4,000 rules, most if not all of which have the force of law.  By contrast, that same year Congress passed and the President signed 214 laws into effect.  That's almost 20 "rules" for every law!  And that is the long-term trend.  Over the past 20 years or so, about 90,000 federal administrative rules have been issued, while over that same period, barely 4,000 laws have been enacted (on the national level).  Granted, only about 20% of the rules are deemed "major" or "significant" based upon how much they cost, but I'd guess those designations depend on who has to abide by them.  What about state and local agencies?

Granted, many laws that are passed created agencies to oversee those laws.  And, admittedly, we can't expect our legislators to be experts on all or even most of these areas.  There is a need for agencies, but the vast number we have?  With the power to create rules that have the effect of law?  And, the courts have often ruled that the executive and legislative branches can't overrule regulatory rules.  (Is that redundant?  Heh Heh.)  In some instances, even the courts have no jurisdiction over the agencies.  Interpretation is left up to the agencies.  It didn't take geniuses to figure out that if the rules were clouded in vagueness, the interpreters had free reign.

I understand most folks don't care.  Likely, at least directly, most people are not affected by the huge number of rules/regulations.  As long as it's the other guy.......  But how many millions if not billions of dollars are added to consumer costs, largely hidden costs, because of federal regulatory agencies?

We've heard some of the ridiculous ones.  Some states prohibit collecting rain water, for instance to water gardens, claiming rain belongs to the states.  You've read about the communities which require kids to procure licenses to have lemonade/Kool-Aid stands.  The federal gov't requires small businesses with 100 or more employees to break down and record pay on the bases of gender and ethnicity.  The list goes on......

Although I think like Calvin Coolidge, maybe I'm the last one to do so.

[As is becoming usual, please overlook/excuse any typos.  I'm getting too old/tired to proofread.]