The Shadow Government

President Trump’s advisor Steve Bannon has been accused of every political sin in the book.  He is supposedly an anti-democratic monster who must be stopped before he—like Godzilla—stomps all over our freedoms and way of life.  As a staunch critic of the press, he is obviously a vicious brute.

It was therefore with some pleasure that I listened to him when he appeared before the recent CPAC conference.  Given that he usually operates behind the scenes, it was nice to hear his voice and governing philosophy first hand.

What impressed me most is how deftly he delineated what is starting to be called Trumpism.  Most listeners focused on the economic nationalism he espoused.  I, however, was captivated by his discussion of administrative bloat.  As a longtime critic of bureaucratic over-reach, it was nice to hear that someone in power is aware of this threat.

We have, in our society, at least two governments.  There is the official one and the shadow one.  The first we elect; the second gets hired and then pulls the strings out of sight.  This second, which consists of career civil servants, always thinks it knows best and is increasingly determined to veto initiatives of which it does not approve.

To make matters worse, operatives in the shadow government can remain in place for decades.  They do not get dismissed when a new party is voted into office.  To the contrary, it is almost impossible to fire them—even when they commit grave malfeasances in office.  They just hunker down and await the next opportunity to assert themselves.

We see this phenomenon at the Internal Revenue Service, the State Department, and the Department of Justice.  It is also on display at the Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Election Commission and the Veteran’s Administration.

Americans wonder why things change so slowing in Washington.  This is one of the primary reasons.  Unelected functionaries, most of whom have a liberal bent, see to it that some policies are never implemented and that meddling politicians are chastised.  To do so, they leak information, slow walk programs, or apply laws selectively.

The question is what can be done about this?  One thing is certain; bureaucrats will not reform no matter how eloquently their faults are explained.  Too many are power-hungry ideologues who will not listen.  Others are simply creatures of habit who do not want their perquisites disturbed.

The answer is that we must be draconian.  Small fixes around the edges only alert these folks to put up their defenses.  Like the husband who does not want to do what his wife asks, they say yes and then they do as they please.

So what must be done?  First, agency budgets have to be slashed.  Superfluous personnel must be let go.  If they will not leave, they should be shunted into positions where they can do the least harm.  Some might be sent to North Dakota in the dead of winter.

This, I think, is what Bannon has in mind.  If so, it is understandable why he is hated.  If he means that the federal government must be reduced in size, those who feed at its trough are bound to be terrified.  Since the only way they can be stopped is to eliminate them, they realize their careers are in jeopardy.

And so they will tell us that without them the government would grind to a halt.  We will hear horror stories about how aunt Minnie in Missouri died of starvation because her social security check did not arrive on time.  But don’t you believe it.  Uncle Charlie in Arizona has already died waiting for the VA to set up an appointment.

As Parkinson’s Law tells us, work expands to fill the time available to it.  Give the bureaucrats less time by hiring fewer of them and there will be less gossip around the water cooler.  There will also be less time to get into mischief—and that is what really counts.

So three cheers for Bannon.  I hope he lives up to his word.

Melvyn L. Fein, Ph.D.

Professor of Sociology

Kennesaw State University