Gripe #1: Administrative Agencies

- As an American, it seems that I have been led to believe that my vote has its impact directly on the man/woman that serves as either my Representative, Senator, or President, etc. Regardless of whether or not I voted for them, they represent my vote… so, think about you the voter as being a “vote”, an opinion that in the big picture should be considered regardless of political disagreements.

An administrative agency is a governmental body responsible for the control and supervision of a particular activity or area of public interest. Our society is extraordinarily complex, and no legislature can pass laws specific enough to ensure that all objectives are achieved under all circumstances. Legislatures lack the time and expertise to make the necessary rules to govern the operations of complex areas of our social and economic life, such as energy, taxation, transportation, environmental pollution, employee safety, and communication. Neither do legislatures have the time or expertise to supervise the many details of these complex areas on a daily basis. As a result, legislatures delegate these responsibilities to administrative agencies, or regulators. These agencies exist at all levels of government: federal, state, and local.

With the definition mentioned above, the idea of an administrative agency to handle the finer, more technical things in life make perfect sense

So where’s the gripe, John?

My main gripe is with administrative agencies on the federal level. These agencies regulate all of us, to include what our home states may or may not do in regards to federal regulations. These agencies are appointed by the nation’s legislative branch, and this is where it causes me some angst.

Today, in my business law course we discussed administrative agencies and there was a special point my professor made with a rather delicate delivery. It has long been a question whether or not our Legislative Branch had the authority to give administrative agencies the power to not only enforce laws, but also to create laws. Remember, the responsibility of creating laws rests solely with the Legislative Branch of our government, and this presents a contradiction that I do not find to be very comforting.

As citizens, we are given open access to express our positions on issues being dealt with legislatively. We can call our representatives, and our senators, and provide them with reasons on why we feel they should vote a certain way on a certain issue. The system is supposed to work to where the representative/senator gauges the desires of his/her constituents and votes according to what the people he/she represents, wants. However, when the Legislative Branch creates an administrative agency and essentially abdicates their lawmaking authority to this agency, I feel as though our vote disappears.

Legislatures lack the time and expertise to make the necessary rules to govern the operations of complex areas of our social and economic life, such as energy, taxation, transportation, environmental pollution, employee safety, and communication. Neither do legislatures have the time or expertise to supervise the many details of these complex areas on a daily basis. As a result, legislatures delegate these responsibilities to administrative agencies, or regulators.

The pro to this structure is efficiency, and it allows the right people with the right skill-set to apply their knowledge and expertise to provide the best and most relevant regulatory ideas. However, there is one pratfall to this idea and that is (as noted in my class today) that the regulatory agencies/commissions end up being captured by the very people the agency/commission was designed to regulate. This creates a conflict of interest nightmare. This basically says to an industry, “We need to make sure you are abiding by federal standards as it pertains to your role in this society, so we are going to let you hold yourself accountable to us.”

Here is some more detail to my gripe: Where did my vote go? Where did the power of the people go?

If you have been following along, the vote seems to have stopped at our representatives and the power we voted for them to have, they have abdicated to an agency that does not consider we the people in terms of our rights as voters to know what our legislators are supposed to do. Again, my gripe is geared at the federal level as I think it is impossible for one seat of government to be able to create and enforce specific laws for each of our diverse towns/cities. Agencies at the state and local levels make sense to me because I think there is more focus with the smaller scale that helps prohibit the appropriate law for one state or local agency from wrongly being applied to an unrelated context.

So where did my vote go? Today in class, this question may have been asked by me, but there were others in the class who shared this concern so I was not alone.

John, have you thought about a potential solution?

Not really, but let me share with you what I feel I understand to be the role of the Legislative Branch and administrative agencies. I am under the impression that administrative agencies are supposed to serve as research entities to provide the specifics based on expertise, to the Legislative Branch to help propose laws that we the people can vote on, and once these laws are confirmed, the administrative agency will then have the authority to enforce what the people confirm. I do not like the idea that our representatives give their law-creating power to an agency, wrought with conflict of interest, to tell us what to do without the people’s confirmation of whether or not we accept that. We are essentially not able to have input into these agencies’ findings or to confirm their research which led to their suggestions for laws. Given the powers of lobbyists and the number of special interest groups that exist, the political vulnerability of administrative agencies should concern the average citizen as lobbies and special interest groups only perpetuate the exclusivity of power experienced by the administrative agencies.

Examples of Administrative Agencies include: Internal Revenue Service (how “government” this agency may be is up for debate to many people), the Environmental Protection Agency (the uncertainty of climate change plays real big here), Consumer Product Safety Commission (the right lobbying, and the right politicking can neuter this agency’s purpose).

I understand that I sound critical, but this is not for the deconstruction of government or me being “mad as hell” but about asking the right questions and performing our civic duty to maintain the power of We the People by making sure we not only stay involved politically, but also intellectually.

I also understand that this is very libertarian, but bear in mind this is only in regards to Administrative Agency appointees, who do not get cycled out or retained by constituents every election cycle.

Gripe #2: The iPad

First, I’m a firm believer of waiting for the second or third generation of a given product, but that is mostly due to financial reasons. Secondly, the iPad is NOT the game-changer people are making it out to be in the way that the iPhone was.

The real world application of the iPad in regards to the average consumer is nowhere near the impact of the iPhone. The iPhone is first and foremost, a phone. Therein lies a necessity to our current society that automatically separates the iPhone Revolution from the iPad Infatuation. There is a huge justification in getting an iPhone because it is a phone vs. getting an iPad because it is cool. There is not enough game-breaking differentiation between the two products, for the iPad to be Apple’s latest Deus Ex Machina. The iPhone is a machine that EVERY consumer can purchase and enjoy without needing to be devoted to the Apple brand. The iPad is only going to be attractive to Mac enthusiasts and will not reach the broad consumer base that is found in the cell phone market, not really changing anything.

John, hold the phones… what does the cell phone market have to do with the computer market, since obviously the iPad is NOT a cell phone? The iPad is creating an in-between market, and this is game-setting, not changing. The iPad is blazing this path and setting rules, unlike the iPhone which completely upended the cell phone market and
is forcing companies to create knockoffs.

Let’s analyze a few competitive advantages (minus product, since we are not analyzing the Apple Corporation) of the iPhone vs. iPad:

Price:
iPad – $500-$1000
iPhone – $299-$599 brand new, in box, unless purchased from Apple store with AT&T contract agreement discount.

Promotion:
iPad: The best portable web experience. Ever. Bigger widescreen iPod with touch controls, a revolutionary mobile device. Covers the middle ground between a smartphone and a Macbook.
iPhone: Widescreen iPod with touch controls, revolutionary mobile phone, breakthrough Internet communications device.

All in all, my excitement for the iPad is long-term. I think the iPad has the potential to replace the Macbook in the world of mobile computing, and I think the Macbook will begin to morph into the desktop world as components become more efficient and work is no longer limited to just the office.