[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 115 (Monday, July 17, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10079-S10081]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
GUARDING AGAINST BUREAUCRACY
Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, any successful entrepreneur who starts out
small and gradually builds their business up knows about bureaucracy.
As his or her company grows, so do the piles of paperwork, and the
number of employees handling it, and pretty soon projects that used to
take a day are taking weeks, or even longer. Lines of communication
that used to be clear and open become tangled and confused. What began
as a lean machine too often turns into a convoluted, Rube Goldberg
contraption.
``In every small business lies the seeds of a bureaucracy.''
I read that line in a recent column in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune--
a piece by Mark Stevens entitled ``Action Needed to Guard Against
Bureaucracy.''
``Rules begin to sprout,'' wrote Mr. Stevens, ``and procedures start
to take hold that do more to complicate life than to achieve
objectives. Left unchecked, these enemies of efficiency tend to
multiply until they choke the business.''
How many entrepreneurs, do you suppose, have choked on their own
enemies of efficiency? How many have been done in by a self-generated
bureaucracy that simply ate up resources, devoured precious time, and
clouded the original goals outlined in the business' master plan?
Judging by the rate that small businesses come and go in this
country, I guess that it is a significant number. Bureaucracy is a lot
like hail on a cornfield--a little is not going to hurt, but too much
of it can be disastrous.
And nobody knows more about bureaucracy than the folks who work here
on Capitol Hill.
Mr. Stevens was writing about small business in his article, but he
could just as easily have been describing the
[[Page S 10080]]
Federal Government--the biggest bureaucracy this world has ever known.
I have said it often: small business and Government actually have a
great deal in common. But the bureaucratic problems that can plague a
small business are magnified a million times in Washington.
Imagine having so many new regulations that it took 65,000 pages to
print them last year alone.
Imagine having so many employees that you are not only far and away
the largest employer in the Nation, but your annual receipts put you at
the very top of the Fortune 500 list as well.
Imagine having your finger in so many pies that diversified is just
too small a word to describe your operation.
Your employees are overseeing thousands of individual little
bureaucracies, thousands of programs, projects, and agencies that have
taken on lives of their own, and have little accountability to the home
office or the folks who ultimately pay the bills--the taxpayers.
That is the Federal Government.
But just as small business owners need to take steps to clear out the
cobwebs of bureaucracy and get back to basics to survive, so should
Washington.
In fact, the line that originally caught my eye in Mr. Steven s
article could easily be turned around to read: ``In every bureaucracy
lies the seeds of a small business.''
Re-exposing those seeds to the light of day and refocusing on the
basics is the key to what we are now trying to create in Congress--a
Federal Government that runs with the same efficiency as an effective
small business.
In his column, Mr. Stevens outlined four steps that managers can use
to gauge whether a business is drowning in bureaucracy, and suggestions
on how to turn things around if it is. His ideas work equally well when
applied to the Federal Government.
Step No. 1:
Review company rules and procedures, questioning why they
were established and, equally important, if they still make
sense.
[Eliminate] anything that detracts from your company's
ability to achieve its business objectives rapidly and
productively.
Of course, the National agenda changes with time and circumstances,
but we are in a period now where our objectives, as mandated by the
voters, seem better focused than ever.
Provide for the Nation's needs, protect the unprotected, and
unshackle our job providers, so that they are able to put more
Americans to work in new, higher paying jobs.
Mountains of Federal rules and procedures litter the track and keep
the objectives out of reach.
Sure, they may create Federal jobs--after all, there are some 128,000
regulators on the Federal payroll--but in reality they are job-killers
for the private sector, with a cost to the economy as high as $1.65
trillion each year.
More Government jobs are not the answer.
That is why the efforts in this Congress toward regulatory reform,
and the legislation we are considering on the floor, are so critical.
Cutting back the forest of Federal regulations will make Government
more efficient. Loosening the bureaucracy will free Government to meet
its objectives.
Step No. 2:
Take a fresh look at payroll, asking if you really need all
of the people who work at your company. Investigate whether
some people have been added to back up others--who have
little to do themselves--or to enforce the wasteful rules and
procedures already in place.
Small business owners often work 80-hour weeks just to barely break
even. When they see how the Government wastes their tax dollars, they
get furious. They could not run their business the way Congress runs
the Government, with reckless overspending and billion dollar deficits.
The Government would toss them in jail.
Many businesses, large and small, realized during the past decade
that bigger does not necessarily mean better. To help boost their
profit margin and cut back on the waste, they began downsizing. It is a
move that has saved many businesses from extinction and returned them
to profitability, and it is a move being duplicated here in Washington.
We call it ``reinventing Government.'' With fewer rules and regulations
clogging the pipeline, fewer Federal employees are needed to enforce
them, and fewer taxpayer dollars are wasted.
But re-inventing does not just apply to the number of people on the
payroll, because bureaucracy is more than just employees--it is also
the programs that the employees create, enlarge, and regulate. In the
balanced budget resolution we have crafted, this Congress has taken a
close look at each and every place we are spending the taxpayers'
dollars. If a program or an agency does not meet the test of relevancy,
if it is not meeting an important national need during tight economic
times, then perhaps this nation can do without it.
Small business makes these tough decisions every day--it is about
time Congress makes some tough decisions, too. Writes Mr. Stevens:
Unless you rid your company of this dead wood, you will be
building a bloated company that is likely to sink under its
own weight.
Step No. 3:
Make certain that accountability is built into every job.
Every personal function and responsibility should be
monitored and evaluated. Be sure that seniority is not the
criterion for promotion.
There is a strong correlation to this in Washington. When it comes to
spending decisions on the Federal level, the effectiveness of a
Government program does not always determine whether it gets funded
year after year. Far too often, Government programs get their annual
funding simply because they are there. Unmonitored and unevaluated,
they are often automatically renewed for decades. And nothing breeds
more bureaucracy than an entity which never needs to justify its
existence.
If Washington is serious about guarding against bureaucracy, it will
build accountability into the budget process by sunsetting Federal
spending. Congress needs the opportunity to reexamine what works and
what does not. Just because a program has been around for a while does
not mean it is a good investment.
Step No. 4:
Grant responsible employees the authority to make certain
decisions--for which they now need approval--unilaterally.
Elaborate approvals do little more than slow the company's
response time and make it more difficult to serve customers.
For the Federal Government, that means moving the concentration of
power from Washington back to the States, where it belongs. There is
more than just a physical distance between Washington and the rest of
the country. There are different priorities outside here as well, and
nobody on the other side of the Beltway really believes that Congress
can spend the taxpayers' dollars better than local officials can.
Our responsibility is to leave the decision making where it can do
the most good and speed up the response time to best serve the
taxpayers--who are not only the customers of this Government, but its
owners as well.
``Keep in mind that no one sets out to create a bureaucracy,'' wrote
Mark Stevens. ``But unless you are diligent in protecting it, the
bureaucracy will form on its own.''
Of course, that is exactly what happened in Washington. But if we
follow the same advice that scores of small businesses have used to
pull themselves out of the bureaucratic quagmire--eliminating senseless
rules and regulations, downsizing to promote efficiency, evaluating
spending decisions, and putting faith, and the dollars to go along with
it, in the hands of the States, not Washington--we will shrink the
bureaucracy. And while we are doing that, Mr. President, we will expand
the people's faith in their Government.
Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Grams). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed
to speak for whatever time I shall consume during morning business
between now and 10 o'clock.
[[Page S 10081]]
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________