TEA PARTIES AND PUBLIC CHOICE

Here’s an interesting article on public policy making and the public’s “rational ignorance” of that policy making:

While the theory of public choice can be broadly applied, it is the ideas of "special interests" and "rational ignorance" that are useful in understanding last week's tea parties.

Here's an example of public choice at work. Let's say teachers could benefit by $2,000 each per year (in higher pay or benefits, smaller classes, etc.) from a piece of legislation currently under debate. But the cost per taxpayer averages just $15 per year.

The "special interests" (teachers and politicians) have substantial personal incentive to see that the bill is passed. Teachers, who benefit directly, will use time and money to lobby for the bill. And lawmakers will expect campaign contributions, votes or both, in exchange for their support.

But the taxpayer will remain "rationally ignorant" of the whole process. Why spend time even thinking about an issue when the cost is only $15 per year?

This is why government will tend to grow in excess of what a true democracy really wants. At least, it will grow until those $15 hits accumulate to such a level that people have finally had enough, and in a seemingly spontaneous eruption, the average voter finds the energy to fight back.

In the end, the Tax Day Tea Parties are a very interesting case study for public choice theory. Whether or not they suggest a shift in the political landscape is another issue. If government continues to grow and cost more, we would expect to see more spontaneous voter response.

I suspect that the public has awakened. I’ve spoken with a number of party-goers whose primary concern seemed to be the debt that will be left to their children (and grandchildren).

Via Instapundit.