From the encroachment that accompanies complex, time-consuming, convoluted and cumbersome rental inspection programs, to government-grant research papers concluding that five-to-eight-year-olds prefer clean food as opposed to allegedly sneezed-on food, is it any wonder American’s trust in government to “do the right thing” has hit historic lows?
Just published is the 154-page 2nd annual edition of “Federal Fumbles: 100 Ways the Government Dropped the Ball” by US Senator James Lankford, (R- Okla.).
Just two (of the 100) examples:
“In April 2015 grantees published a paper stating that when children aged five to eight were given the choice between allegedly sneezed-on food and clean food, they chose” (insert drum roll here): “the clean food.”
For this multi-year project involving “clearly groundbreaking research” as Lankford tongue-in-cheek observes, funded by the National Institutes of Health to study what influences a child’s view of food, grantees received a mouth-watering $2 million (p.10).
Meanwhile, the University of Washington (not the football team which is ranked fourth in the county but someone/s on the UW campus who also rank/s, in Lankford’s list of “Fumbles”: 96th) spent $3,920 for, among other “promotional items that had no obvious benefit to research”: custom Snuggies (p.104).
In addition to the custom Snuggies, which are a robe-blanket combo, the UW also spent another $1,179 for embroidered Snuggies, presumably emblazoned with the Husky logo and no doubt for use in the stands during the Peach Bowl on December 31, high noonkickoff, when the dawgs play Alabama’s Crimson Tide, ranked first in the country and maybe the best team ever.
Of course the Chick-fil-A Peach Bowl is played in Atlanta, Georgia and game time temperatures are expected to be 57 degrees with sunshine and perhaps patchy clouds so maybe the Snuggies aren’t for the game but for something else.
Whatever the ‘something else’ might be, the just-completed audit of grants provided the U-dub by the National Science Foundation finds Snuggies an “unreasonable and unallowable” expense.
Hey, their college kids.
Which brings us to adults and rental inspection programs, sold to the public by government as necessary to ensure the snuggable-safety of renters within their humble abodes and without said government assistance inspecting every nook and cranny the hapless would be hopeless – their existence hardly differentiated from the homeless.
‘We’re the government, we’re here to help,” are seven words that explain why, given the examples mentioned here of the 100 and more, distrust is not a bad thing.
“There is a great utility in distrust,” said Karlyn Bowman, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute who studies public opinion. “The Founders certainly saw that it keeps government on its toes.”
Distrust is a good thing. So is the ability to make good judgments a good thing, if not as concerns government, a rare thing. And good judgments are those demonstrated by doing that which is most simple and satisfactorily effective given the most admirable economy of effort and expense.