This article has previously appeared in LP News.
Should Libertarian candidates be “Goo Goos”? I believe that advocating certain types of Goo Goo legislation is basically a low-risk tactic that may produce liberty-enhancing outcomes.
The term “Goo Goo” is political slang for advocates of so-called “good government” reforms. (I believe the term was widely used during civil service reform campaigns during the Nineteenth Century for elimination of political patronage.) Unfortunately, many contemporary self-identified Goo Goos support activist government, and much legislation they support would reduce our liberty. (The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act is a prime example.)
However, in my opinion some types of Goo Goo legislation tend to be liberty-enhancing. These include:
Sunshine legislation: The term refers to laws that make it easier for citizens to monitor the activities of government. Provisions in such laws may include requirements that government agency meetings be open to the public, and that certain types of documents be made available at reasonable cost to citizens upon request. An important example of a sunshine law at the federal level is the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”).
Sunset legislation: The term refers to laws mandating that government programs automatically end by a specified date unless the programs are explicitly reauthorized. Many such laws were passed by state governments in the 1970s and 1980s. A few states subsequently repealed these laws. Such repeals were sometimes justified by claims that the task of reviewing whether endangered government programs were actually necessary imposed too heavy a burden upon legislators and staff.
OIG legislation: Several government agencies have an Office of Inspector General (“OIG”). Many federal departments and agencies have OIGs, as do several departments and agencies at the state and local level.
Robert Redding, a consultant to the Office of Inspector General in Montgomery County, Maryland, wrote about the importance of local OIGs in Capital Ideas, a National Taxpayers Union Foundation publication. He noted that the statutory mission of the Montgomery County OIG includes the following:
* To prevent and detect fraud, waste, and abuse in government activities
* Review the effectiveness and efficiency of county programs and operations
* Propose ways to increase the legal, fiscal, and ethical accountability of county departments and county-funded agencies.
Additional types of potentially liberty-enhancing Goo Goo legislation include establishing ombudsmen for government departments and agencies, developing nonpartisan commissions and processes for redistricting, and establishing proposed legislation review committees. (Such committees would vet all proposed legislation to determine whether such legislation passes Constitutional muster.)
I believe there are several potential advantages to Libertarians advocating Goo Goo legislation, including the following:
1) Advocacy of Goo Goo legislation by a Libertarian candidate may force his opponents to address and perhaps support such legislation. In my experience, candidates find it very difficult to oppose openly the concepts of sunshine, sunset, and OIGs. Libertarian support for well-crafted Goo Goo legislation may push other candidates to climb aboard that bandwagon.
2) Many journalists I have met are (or consider themselves to be) protectors of the citizens against the power of the state. Hence, many journalists who cover politics and government affairs frequently support Goo Goo legislation, especially sunshine laws. I believe LP candidates who promote such legislation well are more likely to gain the attention and respect of “the Fourth Estate.”
3) Some LP candidates I have met have little idea how government actually works or what powers they would have if they were actually elected. Such candidates are easily dismissed by voters as being ignorant concerning the offices they seek. Candidates who promote Goo Goo legislation are more likely to be seen as serious, thoughtful, and responsible advocates of reducing the size and scope of government.
By suggesting that Libertarians promote such legislation, I am not suggesting that we avoid advocating the elimination of government programs. To the contrary: we should be bold in calling for elimination of programs that do not pass muster on moral, constitution, or prudential grounds. However, given that big government is likely to be around for a while, enactment of such legislation should make it easier to keep government from growing even larger.
Promoting Goo Goo legislation should be an adjunct to, not a replacement for, promoting hallmark Libertarian positions. Libertarians who advocate Goo Goo ideas are unlikely to be elected due solely to such advocacy. Indeed, I suspect it would be difficult for any candidate to win simply by promoting good government ideas. (If support of such ideas clearly becomes popular, all candidates are likely to become advocates of the ideas.)
Please note that crafting specific Goo Goo proposals properly can take a great deal of time and effort. Moreover, adoption of sunshine, sunset, and OIG legislation, even when such legislation is well crafted, will not necessarily reduce the size and scope of government. Restraining expansive government through sunshine, sunset, and OIG laws usually requires a great deal of hard work by citizens.
However, I believe promoting the right type of good government legislation will be helpful, both in aiding our campaigns and in moving us toward a Libertarian society. I hope LP candidates will give the Goo Goo tactic a whirl.
Excellent piece!