[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 98 (Thursday, June 15, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1259-E1260]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                    A SENSIBLE ROLE FOR OF GOVERNMENT

                                 ______


                          HON. LEE H. HAMILTON

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, June 14, 1995
  Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I would like to insert my Washington 
Report for Wednesday, June 14, 1995, into the Congressional Record.
                     A Sensible Role For Government

       The heart of the political debate today is over what is the 
     core responsibility of government. Some insist that fairness 
     requires federal standards for assistance and help to all who 
     qualify. Others say those federal standards have created a 
     mess and want to shift various social programs to the states. 
     Some see a government responsibility to help rebuild 
     neighborhoods and communities and to promote common moral and 
     social principles. Others see an activist government as the 
     problem, not the solution, and insist that government has 
     destroyed peoples' sense of responsibility.
       Most Americans would agree that government cannot solved 
     all our problems but does have a role to play. Government is, 
     after all, nothing more than people coming together to 
     accomplish what they could not do on their own. It's about 
     cooperation and helping each other for our mutual benefit. 
     What Americans want is a government that works better and 
     costs less; that is more responsive to the needs of the 
     average American.
       To develop a sensible role of government, I think we need 
     to keep a few basic points in mind:


                           government success

       First, there have been major government successes. In 
     public meetings in Indiana I will often ask whether anyone 
     can name a federal program that works well. Usually not a 
     single hand goes up, even when the audience is filled with 
     people who are getting social security checks every month, 
     who drove to the meeting on the interstate highway system, or 
     received a first-rate education because of the GI Bill.
       There have, of course, been failings of government 
     programs, but we should not let the shortcomings blind us to 
     the very real successes of government programs. Social 
     Security, for example, is the biggest federal program and is 
     also one of the most successful. It has had an enormous 
     impact on the lives of seniors. Without it, the poverty rate 
     of seniors would jump from 14% to 50%. And Social Security's 
     administrative costs are less than 1% of benefit payments.
       Many other examples could be
        given. Programs to feed infants and pregnant women, to 
     teach preschool children in Head Start classes, student 
     loans, safe drinking water, medical research are all 
     valuable programs. Our agricultural research and extension 
     service has helped make U.S. farmers the world's best. The 
     aerospace and computer industries owe their origins to 
     federal programs. Even the enormously popular Internet was 
     set up by the federal government. The FBI is the most 
     respected law enforcement organization in the world. And 
     our armed forces are preeminent in the world.
       It may be unpopular to point out some good things about 
     government, but it really ought to be done. We simply will 
     never get a sensible role for government if people think of 
     government as the enemy.


                          government failures

       Second, there have been government failures. The ``Star 
     Wars'' antimissile defense system, burdensome regulations on 
     business, tax, subsidies that lead U.S. companies to move 
     jobs overseas, all are wasteful. There is no reason to have 
     689 federal programs for rural development or more than 150 
     job training programs.
       Every problem does not have a legislative solution, and 
     legislators, who are used to solving problems, must remember 
     that. One particularly bad procedure, often used in recent 
     years, is to try to solve a national mega-problem with one 
     huge mega-bill, consisting of thousands of pages. Congress 
     must narrow its agenda.
       Various federal programs--no matter how well intentioned 
     and no matter how impressive the title--simply don't work. 
     And we will never be able to develop a sensible role of 
     government if we think otherwise.


                      sensible role of government

       Third, our goal should not be big government, or small 
     government, but effective government. The American public is 
     very skeptical of government, and is demanding a less 
     government-centered approach to national problems. Government 
     still has many valuable roles to play, but only if it can do 
     things more
      efficiently and more effectively. To get there we must be 
     willing to think about the role of government less 
     ideologically and more pragmatically--what, after all, 
     works. Those government programs that work well should be 
     kept or expanded; those that don't should be reformed, 
     terminated, or turned over to someone else.
       The private sector has taken this approach in recent years. 
     Government should follow suit. Those companies which have 
     been most successful in reforming themselves did not try 
     simply to downsize--to cut costs or personnel by a certain 
     amount--but to rethink what they have been doing--looking at 
     their various missions and expanding on what they are doing 
     well and abolishing what doesn't work.
       The same should be true for government. From the President 
     on down to the local level, public officials and citizens 
     need to get engaged. We need to address several questions:
       What should be the appropriate role of the federal 
     government as we approach the 21st Century? [[Page E1260]] 
       If the federal government weren't already carrying out a 
     certain program, would it be created today?
       Can we pay for whatever we decide the government ought to 
     do?
       Do states have sufficient resources and capability to 
     resume the full role under the Constitution?
       What should be the balance between the private sector and 
     the public sector?
       If we undertake this effort, I think we will be getting at 
     the core of what bothers American about government and its 
     performance. And we would be undertaking a comprehensive, 
     objective review of the federal government that is clearly 
     long overdue. We might not only get better government, but 
     also government that is more broadly supported by the 
     American people.
     

                          ____________________