When local government’s politicians and bureaucrats propose big projects, they should ask themselves: would we run on it? That is, would they run on a standalone vote for (or against) their proposal?
The open secret of local politics is that I’d guess many – if not most – of the big projects proposed would fail if put to a vote. Often, that would not be a matter of cost, but of priority: Many projects are generally needless, benefiting only a few well-placed businessmen. Genuine needs of a truly disadvantaged few are ignored.
Local politicians and bureaucrats know this well, so they (1) conceal fiscal costs, (2) conceal or lie about other reasoned objections to a project, (2) conceal or lie about the actual beneficiaries (their cronies) of a project, and (4) use their willing toadies in the local press to trumpet imaginary successes after a project is completed.
I’ve no doubt that if the Innovation Center, for example, had been put to a referendum in Whitewater, it would have failed. Claims for it have been false promises, exaggerations, or outright lies. Not one of the boosters of that project would have won a stand-up contest on its merits.
Those gentlemen imagine themselves town notables, but they’ve an effective political circle only of hundreds, in a town of thousands.
Now, someone might propose a question on principle, and run on it regardless of the chances for success. Most local town squires are not like this – they’d rather win behind closed doors than contest an issue fairly before all the public.
They feel this way, surely.
Then again, everyone else knows this about them, too.