Mr. McMunn, for many years editor of The Ohio Farmer, recently became full-time Director of Public Affairs for the Cleveland-based Harvest Publishing Company.
You can’t trust any existing agency of government to protect the interests of the people of this country. The cure is to set up yet another agency. That one, you will be able to trust! This is the thinking of those who support the proposed Consumer Protection Act which would establish a new watchdog agency within the federal government.
Advocates of big government justify every proposal on the basis of what it allegedly will do for people. Overlooked is what it will do to them. The price tag is never displayed. This is the case with the Consumer Protection Act. The implication is that existing agencies of government are not protecting the interests of people. All this will change when a super agency is established to control existing agencies of government. That is the claim.
The point is that everyone in this country is a consumer. We are also taxpayers—at least most of us. All are affected by almost every act of government. The interests of “consumers” can’t be sorted out into a neat little pile.
Isn’t it a bit silly to believe that creating another agency and dubbing it the Consumer Protection Agency can really protect everyone? We have agencies, bureaus, courts and laws. There are the U.S. Department of Agriculture, The Interstate Commerce Commission, The Federal Trade Commission, The Public Utilities Commission. There are dozens of others. All are to protect someone against something.
One of the greatest threats to the people of this country is the threat of big government. Every decision you turn over to someone in government is a decision you no longer can make for yourself. It is impossible to have freedom and stifling government bureaucracy at the same time. Choose one and you lose the other.
No one can ever estimate the cost of a Consumer Protection Agency. Some have estimated it at $60 million for the first three years. But the real cost is not what it might add to the federal budget and what you would pay in extra taxes. The real cost is in ways it would stifle the economy and throttle actions of existing agencies of government.
We already have abundant waste caused by one agency intervening in the decisions of another. It is part of the “red tape” which adds to the cost of every government project. Paper work, permits, inspections, and approvals required by government agencies add to the cost of every item you buy.
Imagine what happens to government and industry costs when a new super agency starts to tell people what they can and cannot do! This is a cost people will be forced to pay. Also, what happens to your ability to get a decision you can depend upon in making plans for the future.
Too Much Regulation
There is abundant evidence that a major reason for our economic troubles is too much regulation, not too little. We have already piled one level of regulation on top of another.
We are slow to learn from experience. Companies flourish and grow large when they meet the needs of consumers. They fail when their products are not accepted by consumers. There is nothing new about this. Why is it you don’t see many Edsel, DeSoto or Essex cars on the roads today? Why do you see Fords, Chevrolets and Plymouths? People made decisions. And they made those decisions without the aid of a government agency.
Demand for a protection agency stems from the belief that consumers aren’t smart enough to pick and choose. That an all-wise government agent should look out for them. But, there is little to indicate that giving a person a government title confers with it wisdom not possessed by other average persons. Look at our present maze of bureaucratic decisions as you ponder this one!
Substituting government regulation for free choice in the market place always leads to the same sad end. Incentive is stifled. Production is discouraged and the people suffer. Political liberty and economic dictatorship just don’t go together.
The truth is that those who are pushing for more government are disciples of socialism. They may talk about protecting free enterprise but that is not what they are trying to accomplish.
Protection is a funny business. Almost every protectionist wants to protect someone else against his folly. Even the underworld makes a big thing of the protection business. Big-city hoodlums offer all kinds of “protection” with little concern for the wishes, of the protectee.
Impractical demands upon auto makers added to the cost of cars and made them less acceptable to many buyers. This is part of the reason for the selling slump which has put many employees out of work and contributed to the economic depression. All this was to protect people.
You don’t need to search far to find examples of what consumer protectors have already done for you. A look at a recent electric bill can provide one example. Only a few years ago these same consumer protectors were demanding an end to many forms of pollution. They showed no concern for the cost. Their slogan was: “Make the polluters pay.”
Our air and water pollution control laws were a response to public demand. They were strong on demands with little regard for practicality and cost. The result is just beginning to show.
A major reason for soaring electric bills is the cost of pollution control devices, strip mine reclamation legislation, environmental impact studies and other types of protection. As an example, just two scrubbers to cut down air pollution from one generating plant owned by the Ohio Edison Company will cost more than the entire Ohio Turnpike. They may be environmentally desirable, but contribute nothing to the supply of electric energy. Other electric utilities are making similar expenditures. The cost must be paid in electric bills.
The Unseen Aspects of Intervention
A weakness of most consumer pressure groups is that they are organized for a particular purpose. They “demand” clean air, clean water, lower prices, better service, or more information. Many of their demands are in conflict with each other. There is always a price tag. You can’t do just one thing. Any change in the economy is bound to affect something else.
But, the self-proclaimed public protectors flit from one demand to another, blithely ignoring the costs they are heaping upon the consumers they claim to be protecting.
During recent months electric utilities have been forced to seek a succession of rate increases. These were necessary because of soaring production costs. Utilities must make a profit if they are to have the billions which are needed to install pollution control devices, and build new plants to supply power needs of the future.
Who are the most vocal foes of the rate increases? Often they are the same people who “demanded” the environmental improvements which made the rate increases necessary. Another of their demands was that utilities should not be permitted to advertise. Their argument was that advertising is a needless expense.
The truth is that the attempt to ban advertising was aimed at keeping the utilities from telling their story to the public. The consumer protection groups, of course, would tolerate no such tampering with their right to communicate. That would be infringement upon the right of free speech!
In the case of the utilities, banning of all advertising could save consumers only an insignificant amount of money. The delays in rulings and other costs they created have added greatly to the cost of electric power.
Examine the Motives
We need to look closely at the motives back of every consumer protection group. Many are sincere and well-intentioned. In some cases their intentions are better than their understanding of economics. Too many are dedicated to a single aim with no concern for how others may be affected. Then there are still others who are using consumer protection as a smoke screen to hide their real purpose. This is destruction of the American system of private enterprise.
In any case, there is little to suggest that adding another costly federal agency will suddenly accomplish what the present maze of government has failed to do. Elected officials are responsible to the people. Their stewardship is reviewed at regular intervals. Those who fail to serve the people are relieved of their responsibilities. This is as it should be.
Every demand known to man can be lodged with some agency of government. This doesn’t mean that all should be granted. But a super agency with power over other existing agencies could create staggering costs, endless confusion and less freedom to make individual choices. All this in the name of consumer protection!
If we need a super agency to protect us from the neglect of present agencies, then it is clear we will soon need yet another agency. This is an agency to ride herd on the Consumer Protection Agency. Otherwise, who is to protect us from our protectors?
Reprinted from The Ohio Farmer, April 19, 1975. Copyright, The Harvest Publishing Company.
