The Real Problem with Wonderboy's Agenda

I wrote this post Friday on the topic of the speed and nature of Wonderboy's administration's efforts to engineer social change in the US.

However, in discussing this again, at length, with a friend this weekend, he related Ben Stein's comments on a recent appearance on Neil Cavuto's Fox News program.

Stein noted that the underlying problem with this administration, the prior one, and the Congress, is its unconstitutional behavior.

The takings of AIG, summary firing of GM's CEO, without being a shareholder, and forcible injection of government into our large banks, are all basically violations of the Constitution.

Friday's Glenn Beck program reiterated this. His studio audience, drawn from tax day tea parties, unanimously voiced a dissatisfaction with the manner in which neither party, nor the major media, will listen to the concerns of average voters. Or their complaints that so much of the federal government's recent behavior is simply not constitutional.

This seems to be the primary concern. If there were open, long and deep debate about major policy changes, e.g., energy, health care, financial industry structure, transportation, large deficit spending, that would be one thing. If Congressmen were spending significant time with their constituents and state governments discussing the costs, benefits and merits of these programs, at least voters would feel that their elected representatives were seriously airing the impacts of changes.

Instead, the whole matter has the feel of a unilateral federal imposition of some disembodied will on an unconsulted electorate.

The nature of recent federal action, including president Bush's last year, has been ever more intrusion by government into the private sector, rather than erring on the side of more personal freedom and rights.

With Bush, it was, I think, more accident and short-termism than carefully planned federal expansion. With Wonderboy, I think it's the latter. And so, I think, do a lot of other voters.