After Blawgconomics' recent, self-imposed hiatus from the blogosphere, and after a few failed attempts to shake off the malaise and ennui stemming from a weeklong shutdown of the District, I went in search of inspiration today. I am happy to report that I found my muse in the form of a brilliant painting by Claude Monet. The particular offering from the French master that caught my attention was one of his impressions (pardon the pun) of Venice (the curious can find it here). It was as notable for his use of blues as for the fact that, despite my extraordinary luck in having visited some of the most spectacular museums in the world, I don't believe I have ever seen one of this series. And for an admittedly amateur, though passionate fan of the Impressionists, that was enough to inspire me back to the keyboard for a posting.
Though monsieur Monet inspired the action, the inspiration for today's topic was the current home of his Palazzo da Mula, also known as the National Gallery of Art. For those who have not had the opportunity to visit the US capitol, the National Gallery is one of a number of free cultural experiences in the city including the Smithsonians and the National Botanic Gardens, among many others, with one thing in common notable for law students on budgets; there is no entrance fee. This contrasts very favorably with the museums in, for example, my hometown of Boston, or my adopted second city New York. In these cities, as well as many others I have had the opportunity to visit, museums at the very least post a strongly encouraged 'donation' which one is invariably guilted into. In my experience the vast majority have more than a strongly encouraged price, with admission costing anywhere from $10 to $20 for a student. In any case, an afternoon of culture can end up being a very pricey proposition in many cities around the world. And with good reason. Between paying the lighting, cooling, heating and staff bills, not to mention the security costs of protecting some of the most valuable assets in the world, the monthly layout for these institutions make my cellphone bill look like a grain of sand on a beach.
However, today's excursion was different. My trip to the National Gallery was free. And though the Gallery has, since its founding, been the beneficiary of nearly incalculable private support, many of the day to day functions of the facilities are funded by Uncle Sam. Though it is tough to say in while in the midst of the Great Recession, and particularly while I am personally (euphemism alert) in between jobs, it is important for such treasures as the Gallery and the Smithsonians to recieve public funding. The fact is, I don't mind some of my tax money going to such things. In fact, I prefer it. This realization lead to an earth-shattering, mind-blowing, history-changing idea that could solve the problems of the nation, put the US back on track to retaining its superpower status in a world of growing Chinas and EUs, and eliminate the budget deficit, yet nonetheless has no chance of happening. Though admittedly whimsical, it would go something like the following.
Change our tax system to a flat tax which those below the poverty level are exempt from, then allow Americans to chose where that percentage of their incomes goes. Maybe it would be the Gallery. Maybe schools. Maybe roads, police, or fire. Though there would, of course, need to be many details worked out, we can, for the sake of brevity, dispense with many of the more niggling ones because of the inescapable certainty of the idea not coming to fruition. In all fairness, however, it would not be impossible to work out some of the major details. Anyone who has seen a congressional budget knows the excrutiating detail these annual bills go into; otherwise it wouldn't be so easy to hide 'bridges to nowhere.' Would it really be difficult to code all of these line items and put them online? Many studies put in-home internet access anywhere from 70-80%; others have the ability to access the internet at relatives' homes or other places, such as the local library. People could reasonably look up their pet project and choose to fund it.
What if something would be perpetually underfunded? A certain percentage of tax dollars could be allocated to state governments to make sure essentials are covered. This percentage would also go to other essentials such as defence and the running of the government itself. What about particularly popular items which would always be overfunded? Budgets could be submitted ahead of time; when that budget is met, allocation dollars could go to other, needier projects. What about items people don't consider every year, such as roads? This actually acts as a self-corrective; if a road is underfunded one year, users are more likely to notice and fund it the following.
There are problems. Accountants probably wouldn't appreciate being made redundant as a profession. Members of congress probably wouldn't appreciate losing their influence as well as the perks they receive from lobbyists looking to sway that influence. The latter is the most realistic barrier to such an idea. However, it would also represent a massive, positive shift in the policy of the nation from what is an increasingly government-influenced economy to a much more populist model where money is more efficiently allocated and spent. It would also better reflect the ever-changing ideals of the nation where constant feedback is given to those holding the pursestrings in the form of allocation votes. The best thing of all; the only money spent would be the money coming in from taxes, therefore eliminating the deficit, shoring up the value of the dollar and ensuring economic strength for the future.
Of course this is an admittedly whimsical idea. It is unrealistic, unfeasible, and politically impossible. However, it is interesting to think 'what if?' sometimes. America, and many other parts of the developed world, are in rough shape these days. That said, there are a lot of people in Washington, DC tonight that could do a lot worse than ponder over some fresh ideas, however wacky they may at first blush seem.
No comments:
Post a Comment