America Beyond the Expiration Date
by
Michael S. Rozeff
by Michael S. Rozeff
DIGG THIS
The recent
American history of federal energy regulation includes three major
Congressional acts: the Energy Policy Acts of 1992, 2003, and 2005,
three acts that run 393, 1,237, and 550 pages, respectively. The
1992 act has 3,021 sections. The 2003 act has 1,611 sections, and
the 2005 act has 1,840 sections. Long laws make bad laws; and bad
laws are not simply the worst form of tyranny, they are tyranny.
What is in
these acts of Congress? Ordinary people do not know. We do not know.
We have only the vaguest of ideas. Most of us do not even know that
such laws have been passed much less their contents. This ignorance
means that Americans do not govern themselves. We follow orders.
And then we are taken advantage of in ways we are not even aware
of. Sure, every so often we make a statement as in the 2006 elections.
Even abject slaves occasionally speak out against their masters
before being whipped back into line.
A few of us
know the portion of these laws that pertains to our businesses,
but we know little else. A few members of Congress and a few lobbyists
know more. Some trade associations, some business firms, some environmentalist
organizations, and some bureaucrats in the departments of our octopus
state know more too. What do they know? They know the parts of the
whole that apply to them. No one grasps the full content and implication
of these highly detailed regulatory directives. No one knows all
of what such laws mean now and in the future for the people whose
activities they control.
Special
interests run the show
An act of Congress
like these energy statutes is a complex item because today’s markets
are complex. In an economy such as ours, those who attempt to control
and deflect markets and human actions to their own narrow ends must
necessarily devise convoluted and complex statutes. One thing leads
to and is connected with another. When Congress tries to dominate
the free-flowing decisions of millions of Americans, it produces
massive laws. When Congress tries to favor one group over another,
it produces both complex laws and massive injustice.
America’s energy
laws are not the kinds of laws that govern traditional human relations.
These laws are not about crimes, damages, accidents, land boundaries,
and contract disputes. These are laws that tyrannize the general
public while benefitting special interests. They are not really
laws in the traditional sense of being sanctioned by God or even
by man’s conscience. They are decrees or edicts.
How do we get
such laws? Start with a compliant people. Add a Congress receptive
to special interests. Mix in members of Congress with their own
whims and interests who are running amok. Add in a state that knows
no boundaries or limits. Lubricate with money and politics. And
the result? Laws that are the cancerous statutes of a complex and
multiple tyranny.
Behind the
curtains of Congress, enough people understand enough to get what
they want. There do exist rooms, smoke-filled or not, in which lobbyists,
industry representatives, legislative assistants, and politicians
carefully select the wording of each sentence and paragraph that
will destroy the free market and replace it with its unscrupulous
substitute. Man-made laws are not random events.
Whoever these
underhanded people are that build our laws, we can be sure that
each and every section of the law has a purpose that serves them
and not us. Someone somewhere is the winner, while many others of
us are the losers. The winners vary: members of various industries,
members of Congress, members of educational establishments, lawyers,
government employees, bureaucrats, unions, trade associations, etc.
The losers vary: the public, unwary companies, foreign companies,
state governments, the poor, the less fortunate, etc. The picture
is fluid and changing. One group wins at one time and then loses
at another time.
In the long
run, the state is the big winner. Its power augments. Its control
over industries and people augments.
We the trusting
We the people
are not meant to understand how we are being fleeced. That is obvious.
But even worse, the legislative system is so arranged that the resulting
complexity and incomprehensibility are made to seem necessary.
We are made to think that the system is beyond our control and understanding;
it is supposed to be something that we simply have to accept as
part of the natural order of things. And we are led to believe that
we cannot question this order and that this order is essential to
our well-being. We are supposed to believe that anything else but
such laws would bring disaster upon us. And surely if we question
the process or the system by which such laws are manufactured, then
we are made out to be subversive of the sacred democratic order.
Not only are we to be fleeced, we are made to believe that no other
way of life is possible or else we will be even worse off.
We are made
to fear rocking the boat. We are made to fear losing what we have
and drowning. Meanwhile we are slowly being submerged anyway. We
are participating in our own suicide.
Mostly we trust
the lawmakers. Surely, we assume, they must know what they are doing.
Surely, we assume, they are doing their jobs to look out for us.
We cannot bring ourselves to believe that they would deceive us,
that they would systematically pass laws that feather the nests
of a few of us while robbing most of us. But this is precisely what
the business of Congress is, and it has been that way since the
first Congress met in 1789. Congress deceives and robs, robs and
deceives.
The paradox
of tyranny is that it extends itself by changing the political and
social order while indoctrinating us that any attempt to overthrow
or radically revise the existing order of tyranny will bring chaos
and suffering upon our heads. In the name of order and freedom,
we are made to feel we must remain passive. Meanwhile, as we remain
passive, we lose that order and freedom we think we are preserving.
Step by step, we find ourselves in support of a process of tyranny
being extended by degrees.
We the people
know nothing of what laws like the energy laws say or mean. We know
nothing. We are on the receiving end. We merely ratify the tyranny
by voting for our representatives. We are the know-nothings, the
ignoramuses, the rubes who support a carnival with fewer and fewer
attractions and rides. Our duty, we are made to feel, is to take
pride in being part of the democratic process of the greatest and
most free country on earth. We are supposed to vote and affirm this
process. Isn’t this what is drummed into schoolchildren whose rebelliousness
fades with their conditioning and aging hormones? But in fact these
acts of Congress are the magnificent and grand output of American
democracy approaching its apogee. We have a glut of laws. They are
sickness and rot.
America
beyond the expiration date
Where is the
expiration date on this carton? Where is the expiration code on
this bottling up of free markets? Aren’t the contents of these packages
stale, moldy, and rotten? Who wants to pay the clerk for such a
decrepit system as ours? Who wants to continue ingesting tyranny
made in corporate boardrooms, trade association conventions, and
legislative chambers?
The legislative
process is out-of-date, an Enlightenment device that is way past
its prime. Once thought to restrain kingly power, parliaments and
legislatures are past due; and we are paying exorbitant penalties
that are compounding at a rapid rate. If the outmoded and outdated
package is wrapped in new paper, a change of faces in Washington,
will the contents be any less rancid when we open it? If we spray
the outside of the bottle with Lysol, will the spoiled milk inside
become more palatable?
The American
system is grown into an implacable tyranny. The Iraq War is a symptom
of an underlying despoliation of American rights. The contents of
the inner package have been stripped of their preservatives and
left to molder. They are deteriorating before our eyes as the date
stamp for liberty recedes further and further into the past. Before
long, when the smell overpowers us, we shall have to bury the corpse.
Hold your
nose
How far into
any of these laws do we have to read before we run into the stench
of special interests? Not far. I make no effort to read these laws
in their entirety or to choose the most noxious sections. I merely
scroll down a small fraction of the long list. In the 2005 law,
millions upon millions of dollars will go to a university with comprehensive
departments (engineering, architecture, computer science, urban
design, etc.) to study how to build more energy efficient buildings.
Would it be asking too much for builders to fund such research?
Would it be asking too much for them to decide whether such research
would pay off and should be funded? Or how much it should be funded?
Or how to do the research? As we watch new buildings rise, we will
hear about the wonders of the free market while being blithely unaware
that no such free market exists.
Cement or concrete
is to be phased out in federal projects. It is to be replaced by
"recovered mineral component." What is that? That is blast
furnace slag (excluding lead slag), fly ash from burning coal, silica
fume, and any other solid waste that the government designates.
A 30-month study will be conducted, urged on by 10 industry groups
and several cement manufacturers. The industry groups include the
Slag Cement Association, the Steel Recycling Institute, the American
Coal Council, and the Utility Solid Waste Activities Group. Perhaps
slag cement is as superior as it’s advertised to be. This I do not
know. But if it is, then why not let it win its battles in a free
market? Why must it be forced into use with secretive provisions
that most of us know nothing about?
Certain energy
agencies are instructed to favor biodiesel or hybrid engine technologies
when they buy vehicles, the goal being energy efficiency. The lawyers
in Congress have already decided what is cost-effective and what
is not. The National Biodiesel Board that represents the biodiesel
industry says that it "is currently tracking more than 160
pieces of biodiesel legislation at the state level. The bills include
incentives, use requirements, point of taxation clarification, authorization
of studies, state fleet use requirements, biodiesel promotion, and
others." The individual states of this nation share the Congressional
disease. Meanwhile Congress has enacted tax breaks for biodiesel
and other of its favorites.
Congressional
inanities
How ridiculous
can a law of Congress get? Should a federal law have to contain
such language as this? "The term ‘F34T12 lamp’ (also known
as a ‘F40T12/ES lamp’) means a nominal 34 watt tubular fluorescent
lamp that is 48 inches in length and 11/2 inches in diameter, and
conforms to ANSI standard C78.81–2003 (Data Sheet 7881–ANSI–1006–1)."
The 1975 Energy
Policy and Conservation Act required manufacturers to certify that
their motors met the applicable standard. The 1992 energy law dictated
the energy efficiency of motors, but the language was ambiguous
concerning general purpose, special purpose, and definite purpose
motors. Five years later the Department of Energy clarified the
matter by a ruling. Then arose uncertainties regarding the motor
test standards to be used to measure compliance to the law. When
these were thought to be ironed out using industry standards, up
to 20 percent of the motors seemed to fail the tests. The government
was slow to accredit testing labs to understand why this had happened.
Conflicts arose over the methods used to carry out testing, and
the tests mattered a great deal because the law is specific. The
difference between 85 percent and 85.1 percent efficiency might
mean a motor is unacceptable. Each stage of a multi-level test of
a motor involves a degree of inaccuracy. Even the rounding errors
accumulate and lead to large variations in tests. Then came the
issue of sampling of a large batch of motors. Some manufacturers
began to reclassify their motors so as to avoid the precision of
the law. In 2002, which is 27 years after the initial law was passed,
the Department of Energy issued a rule that delayed the certification
date until June of that year because "there was insufficient
independent testing laboratory capacity for testing the thousands
of basic models of electric motors covered by EPCA’s efficiency
standards."
There is more,
very much more. There are issues when it comes to motors manufactured
in Canada or elsewhere. There are reporting requirements. There
are issues of motor definition and as to which motors are regulated.
Meanwhile the states of our glorious Union have taken it upon themselves
to begin their own regulation of electric bikes, mopeds, scooters,
etc. The U.S. is of course not the only state in the world that
regulates electric motors.
I do not know
who the winners in the motor episode are other than the state itself.
I am sure most of us are the losers who have to pay in higher prices
and in the confusions sown in these markets that deter the natural
course of development and innovation.
Our civilization
runs on energy and electrical energy is everywhere. Because it is
regulating energy, Congress must regulate electricity use. And this
implies regulating a vast number of products. For this reason, we
find energy laws that define lamps, ballast, battery chargers, commercial
prerinse spray valves, dehumidifiers, distribution transformers,
external power supply, illuminated exit signs, refrigerated bottled
or canned vending machines, pedestrian modules, portable electric
lamps, unit heaters, ceiling fans, etc., etc.
And, as in
the case of electric motors, every one of these devices is to pass
certain test standards. Which manufacturers want which standards
so as to keep competing brands, domestic and foreign, off the market?
Which unions want to keep foreign products off the market? Which
manufacturers want to freeze standards so that they will not have
to invest and keep up with competition?
Conclusions
What incredible
grief is brought on by such laws! What an incredible waste
of energy! The compliance costs alone outweigh any supposed energy
savings. And we can be confident that society will experience no
energy savings from these laws anyway. We can be certain of net
losses in welfare. With Congress bypassing and disrupting free markets
while subsidizing its chosen favorites such as ethanol, we can be
sure that society is getting net losses in energy and welfare compared
with Congress doing nothing at all.
What Congress
should do is free up all energy sources and allow them to
compete on a level playing field. It is unethical and immoral for
Congress to accede to special interest groups, be they ethanol,
slag cement, or biodiesel. There are members of Congress who may
not favor industry interests but who favor particular environmental
policies for other personal reasons. But it is equally unethical
and immoral that these Congressmen even possess the power to impose
their personal preferences on the whole of society.
What we should
be thinking about is how to dissolve this system of government and
replace it with stripped-down and just self-government. We should
be thinking about what laws are just that we might live under in
a more decentralized way of life. We should be thinking about how
to end the federal stranglehold over this vast nation.
The question
of Washington is not a question of dispatching a few bodies from
its marbled halls. It is a question of polishing off the system
itself and getting back to basics. Such an incredibly overbearing,
detailed, ruinous, suffocating, and unjust system as ours is gone.
It is gone the way of all such baroque legal systems. It has self-destructed
and brought on its own ruin. It has reached too far, lied too much,
and shorn itself of any justifications except power. It has brought
itself down. It has fallen by its own iniquities. The federal and
state governments have collapsed under the weight of their own vast
illegitimacy.
We
are left to learn the lessons from the failed American experiment.
We are left to prepare for a peaceful transition to the next phase
of American life. That phase is renewal, ethical renewal. The time
to prepare ourselves for it is now. The time is short.
November
13, 2006
Michael
S. Rozeff [send him mail]
is the Louis M. Jacobs Professor of Finance at University at Buffalo.
Copyright
© 2006 LewRockwell.com
Michael
S. Rozeff Archives
|