Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Would You Support a Nomadic Capital?
Full disclosure: I have always had a bias against Washington D.C. When I was a child, we would visit family there and it was always uncomfortable. They lived in the right neighborhood in the northwest part of town, sent their kids to the right schools, and worked at the right government agencies…but something was wrong. The odd hierarchy of the city — where there were the connected elites, the government bureaucrats, and the destitute — never sat well with me. Additionally, the huge temples to red tape and massive monuments to politicians did not seem proper in a republic. This caused me to think at a fairly early age that it was a swamp on the Potomac in more ways than one.
As I have grown older, my belief in the inappropriateness of this piece of real estate has increased. The calcified thinking, the “temporary” government servants who have permanently changed address, and the fact that the most affluent ZIP codes in the country are there have become too much. Why is this artificial piece of no man’s land straddling two states the focus of a country of over 300 million souls?
So here is the idea: we disband Washington D.C. and have a roving, nomadic capital. We will add a few roller coasters on what is now the Capitol building and make it a “national funland” where the gate fees could help pay down the debt. Regarding where those who govern determine our laws, the rules become as follows:
- The capital moves every six months
- No city over 50,000 in population can host the capital
- No permanent structures can be built for the temporary capital
- You do not talk about Fight Club…sorry, different post
Think traveling carnival but with more freaks gathered around the flaming garbage cans at night. When the caravan moves on it will be the circus train meets a Mad Max car chase. This would not be just the elected officials either; it would include the whole kit and caboodle, from staffers to lobbyists to think tanks to the assistant of the lead assistant of the head of the Department of Busybodies. The largest constantly moving group of people since Genghis Khan, but the ongoing travel of this horde would be shoring up civilization.
Wouldn’t this result in a healthier republic? The idea of Congress, their staff, and all the hyenas that follow them having to pack up every few months and move on brings a smile to my face. With any luck, this would discourage young people from careers in government and push them towards more productive pursuits.
This change may cause some Ricochet displacements, but they would, generally, be hilarious……..
Wouldn’t you love to hear a Hemingways podcast where they are lost in Oklahoma trying to find the new temporary seat of government, the kids are screaming “are we there yet!?” in the back, and Mollie is saying “it’s time to ask for directions” while Mark insists he knows where he is going? (please note: this is not suggesting the Hemingways are part of the problem — quite the opposite — it’s just that they live in the neighborhood)
Obviously, a moving capital wouldn’t solve all the issues of the republic. But could power be corrupted and entrenched — and could elites thrive as easily — if they shared an outhouse, had to pick up and be constantly on the move, and resided in an old refurbished Winnebago?
OK, is this idea completely implausible and even a little silly? Yes (though I would vote for it if it became proposition 5849). But we need to push the envelope more in our national discussions if we are ever to make real progress. The other side discusses outlandish ideas like maximum wages and we, being pragmatics, generally counter with, “well, eliminating the Bureau of Nonsense is probably unlikely in the next few years so let’s just cut its growth by 10%”. Unless we begin shaping the national debate with some zany ideas that capture the core of our message, we are not going to get anywhere. How has playing defense for the last 100 years worked out for us? Besides, James Pethokoukis has pointed out many times that tomfoolery is down 14% since the recession (at least, I think he has).
Published in General
Much like the Olympics, it feels like a scheme that would hurt the host cities more than it would help.
I would prefer the idea of moving government to The Cloud, if only every past experiment with “electronic democracy-by-remote” wasn’t marred by technical glitches, security breaches, and outright fraud.
If I could have my fantasy-never-gonna-happen-in-bajillion-years system of representative democracy, it would be a randomocracy. Put the SSN of every American over the age of 18 into a great big barrel and choose names at random to sit in the Senate, the House of Representatives, and the Electoral College. One term only.
This would help to reduce the number of permanent residents in the D.C. area.
It wouldn’t hurt to demolish quite a few of Detroit’s freeways, currently running straight through the middle of neighbourhoods which might be much more pleasant in their absence. With Detroit’s much-reduced population, much of that freeway infrastructure is no longer needed. The land could be put to much better use, and the traffic could be diverted to ring roads.
People praise the architecture and ambiance of Moscow’s subway system as well.
;-)
There’s lots of things the Federal government does that do require permanent settlements. And there’s lots of things they do that do require lots of people.
Unless one thinks in anarcho-libertarian terms. But that’s even more fantasy than a gypsy capital.
Think the Pentagon (I’ll use an example no “conservative” would dare question). How many thousands of people work there? Do you want your military commanders moving around in 50-mile long convoys, instead of focusing on the task at hand? How many thousands of people work at the CIA or NSA? Those would have to be some pretty big trucks to carry all those servers and electronic equipment around.
Probably, a lot more expensive than just having a building.
What does make sense, however, is not to have them in 1 location. DC is becoming poisonous indeed. And with today’s technology, there’s no reason to physically concentrate them.
Of course, some gov agencies are already in other locations, like Ricochet’s favorite federal agency, the CDC.
No reason why we can’t ship the White House to Butte Montana.
I disagree.
Quonset huts can be built quickly and cheaply. As such, they have a tendency to proliferate.
A better
planfantasy would be to house all government offices in the Capitol Building and the White House, or even better yet limit all federal (civilian) government property to the 61.4 square miles of the District of Columbia.In other words, limit the government by limiting the amount of real estate available to it.
Up here in the Great White North, up until World War I the ENTIRE civil service was housed in the East and West Blocks of Parliament. Gosh, those were the days!
During the world wars, “temporary buildings” were built to house the increased number of civil servants. The buildings may have been temporary, but the civil servants weren’t. In the post-war years permanent buildings were constructed to house ’em. Many of ‘em are like freakin’ fortresses.
It is (or should be) a fundamental axiom that government office space is not built to accommodate an increase in government employees, but rather that government employees are hired to accommodate an increase in government office space.
From Wikipedia:
In other words, the Pentagon was a massive permanent structure built in response to a temporary situation (World War II).
I recall something happening after WW2. Maybe my recollection is bad, however.
Ten thumbs up! In fact, I would add the caveat that the relocation should be to economically depressed areas, so our elected officials would realize that things aren’t all smelling like roses out here.
If this idea is rejected, then an alternative would be to have a virtual Congress, where members remain in their districts or states, and meet via some video-conferencing method. Heck, they could even be in session and be in a town hall meeting at the same time! Think of what that would be like . . .
Fair enough, that’s why the cities have to be below 50,000 to help limit the damage. I find the randomocracy idea intriguing, being highly concerned about the deep down nature of human character, I’m not sure I’d go for it, but high intriguing none the less.
The European Union has a nomadic capital, and I’m sure the American bureaucratic deep state would handle an American version the same way, if not worse.
Just Google “EU,” “Brussels,” “Strasbourg,” and “cost.”
Anyone still want a nomadic capital?
I’m beginning to get a complex here and that is a rare thing for me…
Well, the Metro does get pretty crowded on the green line after Nationals games. :-)
But I’m baaack after fuming a bit about the Metro.
Here’s the thing: I’m one of the 53% who pay income taxes, payroll taxes for both myself and my employees, property taxes, and insurance premiums that have tripled thanks to the Unaffordable Care Act.
There are few frivolous things that I pay for that I get to enjoy. D.C. public transportation is one and Masterpiece Theatre is another.
So you’ll excuse me if I don’t care to listen to complaints about either of these pleasures. Give this hardworking FiCon a break; I’ve earned it.
ET – OK, in the spirit of Ricochet community I will have a drink tonight in honor of the Metro, but it won’t be easy for me. Might take a couple more drinks for me to forget that drink. But I’m not watching Masterpiece Theatre :)
You’re missing out on Downton Abbey!