No One Can Make Government Work
If businesses don't serve customers well, they go out of business. Government, on the other hand, is a monopoly.

President Joe Biden says, "I know how to make government work!"
You'd think he'd know. He's worked in government for 51 years.
But the truth is, no one can make government work.
Biden hasn't.
Look at the chaos at the border, our military's botched withdrawal from Afghanistan, the rising cost of living, our unsustainable record-high debt.
In my new video, economist Ed Stringham argues that no government can ever work well, because "even the best person can't implement change….The massive bureaucracy gets bigger and slower."
I learned that as a consumer reporter watching bureaucrats regulate business. Their rules usually made life worse for consumers.
Yet politicians want government to do more!
Remember the unveiling of Obamacare's website? Millions tried to sign up. The first day, only six got it to work.
Vice President Joe Biden made excuses: "Neither [Obama] and I are technology geeks."
Stringham points out, "If they can't design a basic simple website, how are they going to manage half the economy?"
While bureaucrats struggled with the Obamacare site, the private sector successfully created Uber and Lyft, platforms like iCloud, apps like Waze, smartwatches, etc.
The private sector creates things that work because it has to. If businesses don't serve customers well, they go out of business.
But government is a monopoly. It never goes out of business. With no competition, there's less pressure to improve.
Often good people join government. Some work as hard as workers in the private sector.
But not for long. Because the bureaucracy's incentives kill initiative.
If a government worker works hard, he might get a small raise. But he sits near others who earn the same pay and, thanks to archaic civil service rules, are unlikely to get fired even if they're late, lazy, or stupid.
Over time, that's demoralizing. Eventually government workers conclude, "Why try?"
In the private sector, workers must strive to make things better. If they don't, competitors will, and you might lose your job.
Governments never go out of business.
"Companies can only stay in business if they always keep their customer happy," Stringham points out. "Competition pushes us to be better. Government has no competition."
I push back.
"Politicians say, 'Voters can vote us out.'"
"With a free market," Stringham replies, "the consumer votes every single day with the dollar. Under politics, we have to wait four years."
It's another reason why, over time, government never works as well as the private sector.
Year after year, the Pentagon fails audits.
If a private company repeatedly does that, they get shut down. But government never gets shut down.
A Pentagon spokeswoman makes excuses: "We're working on improving our process. We certainly are learning each time."
They don't learn much. They still fail audits.
"It's like we're living in Groundhog Day," Stringham jokes.
When COVID-19 hit, politicians handed out almost $2 trillion in "rescue" funds. The Government Accountability Office says more than $100 billion were stolen.
"One woman bought a Bentley," laughs Stringham. "A father and son bought a luxury home."
At least Biden noticed the fraud. He announced, "We're going to make you pay back what you stole!
No. They will not. Biden's Fraud Enforcement Task Force has recovered only 1 percent of what was stolen.
Even without fraud, government makes money vanish. I've reported on my town's $2 million toilet in a park. When I confronted the parks commissioner, he said, "$2 million was a bargain! Today it would cost $3 million."
That's government work.
More recently, Biden proudly announced that government would create "500,000 [electric vehicle] charging stations."
After two years, they've built seven. Not 7,000. Just seven.
Over the same time, greedy, profit-seeking Amazon built 17,000.
"Privatize!" says Stringham. "Whenever we think something's important, question whether government should do it."
In Britain, government-owned Jaguar lost money year after year. Only when Britain sold the company to private investors did Jaguar start turning a profit selling cars people actually like.
When Sweden sold Absolut Vodka, the company increased its profits sixfold.
It's ridiculous for Biden to say, "I know how to make government work."
No one does.
Next week, this column takes on Donald Trump's promise: "We'll drain the Washington swamp!"
COPYRIGHT 2024 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I take issue with calling government a monopoly.
There's more than that. In the 90s, my cable company (A monopoly, the only one allowed to operate in my city) left me dissatisfied. I cut off my cable, it wasn't worth the price.
I can't cut off government. They're worse than a monopoly, by far.
I want to leave the current Federal government. I believe eliminating it would make mine and many people's lives better.
Too bad Lincoln had such a bad reaction to secession. I am not sure why he is a hero for this.
He ensured Individual Liberty for all people?
Habeus corpus?
He jailed journalists who wrote unflattering articles about him and imposed an income tax even though he didn't have the authority to do so.
Income tax versus slavery......... Hmmmmmm......
Is the income tax 100% (i.e. total enslavement)?
Is it liberty if there's a little slavery?
Too many try too hard to enslave others for there to be no national organization in defense of Individual Liberty which requires a bill. If there weren’t any wanna-be slavers and everyone was by nature honorable then and only then could complete liberty exist. A good thing to strive for but the current status shows nothing but lost ground of that goal and the 'income tax' is being used against that goal not for it and that is exactly where the CRIME is.
He didn't free black slaves, he enslaved whites to the government.
...in complete contrast to what FDR did by making slaves out of everyone.
Agree on secession, always have. If someone wants to get a divorce, is it right to beat the crap out of them and kidnap them in the house?
A Union of Slave-States for the WIN! /s
I don’t consider cutting the USA in 1/2 to please treasonous invaders who won’t follow USA principles a win (as if that would satisfy them). I’d consider that losing 1/2 of a once great-nation.
I thank you for acknowledging that freedom is only for White people.
Government and business are not the same and cannot really be compared. Businesses are allowed to focus on select customers to maximize their profits while government is obligated to serve all. If I run a business, I am obligated to serve all the public but I can tailor my product to a group that I think will maximize my profit. Government cannot do the same it has to serve all its citizens. Government is often tasked with providing services to groups that businesses don't want to serve. Also, because government uses public money it often has obligation to report and make decision based on the use of that money. Businesses are often don't have these restrictions. Finally, there are many complaints about businesses and that doesn't mean that they go out of business. People complain about airlines all the time, but few go out of business. Why because it requires huge capital to start up a competing airline. I believe that competition will improve service and lower cost, but I also understand that competition is not uniform over the market. In assessing competition government has the smallest, businesses requiring large capitalization have smaller competition and largest area of competition is in small businesses.
And yet, we have new airlines all the time. E.g., just a quick google search:
More Than 90 New Airlines Are Launching in 2021. They Say It’s the Perfect Time.
A host of upstart carriers around the world have plans to take flight by the end of the year; ‘The timing is pretty good, actually.’ (April 30, 2021)
25 new airlines have launched globally since the pandemic rocked the industry in 2020 — see the list (Dec 2, 2022)
Airline Startups: The New Airlines Set To Launch In 2024: In 2024, 27 new airlines are set to launch, offering a range of unique features and services.
PUBLISHED DEC 31, 2023
Dozens of smaller airlines have merged, been bought, etc.
2001: American Airlines and Trans World Airlines
2005: America West Airlines and US Airways
2008: Southwest Airlines and ATA Airlines
2008: Delta Air Lines and Northwest Airlines
2009: Frontier Airlines and Midwest Airlines
2010: United Airlines and Continental Airlines
2010: Southwest Airlines and Air Tran Airways
2013: American Airlines and US Airways
2016: Alaska Airlines and Virgin America
I get regular emails from Spirit, JetBlue, Breeze, Frontier, etc. announcing new routes.
I counter with this;
https://tnmt.com/the-decline-of-new-airline-foundings/
And that separation is legal 'Gun' force.
As only a F'En moron would give Walmart legal 'Gun' forces and those who lobby for government service are doing exactly that.
As the 1st comment states; It's WORSE than just a monopoly. It's an armed monopoly. When dumb*sses start asking for the halls of justice to provide for them they literally destroy their own justice.
There may not be a lot of room for that kind of logic around this issue.
Keep in mind how many of the people who think that only agents of the Government should be entrusted with the ability to carry firearms also believe that the Government they're working for has them actively "hunting black and brown people" on the streets of every city in the USA.
The left is indeed the party of contradiction.
Or other explanatory phrases - blind sheep, useful idiots.
The reality is that gov does not indeed serve all equally. Gov panders to various political factions often at the expense of others to curry favor and votes. The free market is is not a zero sum game but gov IS. Gov has a proper and vital role to play....that is to maintain a safe environment for commerce to operate in and to protect from external invaders. It has other basic roles like providing courts for dispute resolution and enforcing laws and such. It has not proven to be particularly good at any of the other numerous roles it has appointed itself - particularly those functions that involve what many term social engineering.
The free market is is not a zero sum game but gov IS.
Partisan control of government is zero sum. It is not zero sum when looking at how government serves the people. There’s nothing inherent in government that make it inevitable that there will be some people served well at the expense of others. If nothing else, that is because what it means for government to serve people “well” is subjective. Ultimately, the question is whether people are satisfied with their government or not.
It has not proven to be particularly good at any of the other numerous roles it has appointed itself – particularly those functions that involve what many term social engineering.
The free market left alone didn’t always prove itself to be good at its supposed role, either. Pollution and other forms of (mis)management of natural resources by the free market was the norm prior to government taking a direct role in those things. I know very well that libertarians don’t think much of environmental regulation, but I’ve never seen free market solutions to most environmental problems. (I’ve seen a fair amount of rejection of the existence of some problems, though.)
As for “social engineering,” that is a valid point and then some. Of course, you just know I have to go all “both sides” on that. Because it is both sides. For every progressive that wants government to promote “diversity” and police “hate speech” in public, there is a conservative that wants to make sure that women who dare to have sex outside of marriage have to endure the shame and stay pregnant and have a baby, plus the religious conservatives that want to be sure that everyone knows that America is a Christian Nation by putting up Ten Commandment monuments, or make public schools put up signs that say, “In God We Trust” in every classroom.
So, I do agree that voting and elections aren’t as good at incentivizing government to be effective as the free market is for (most) businesses. Too many people don’t care about how well or efficiently government functions nearly as much as they care about using government power to win the culture war.
"There’s nothing inherent in government that make it inevitable that there will be some people served well at the expense of others."
It's not inherent in the concept of government, but it's definitely baked into the ideology of "progressive" statists as they exist in the USA/DSA. What other way is there to describe their dream system in which most of the population gets vitrually everything (education through at least college, health care, UBI, and state-funded pensions on top of it all) for "free" and that "the 1%" will somehow pay for it all.
"There’s nothing inherent in government that make it inevitable that there will be some people served well at the expense of others."
If by 'served' you mean resources then do tell ... exactly what resource do politicians go to work creating everyday? There really isn't a magical resources tree in the back of the white house.
In the realm of resources Gov is a zero-sum resources because the only way it 'serves' resources is by either enslaving others or STEALING it. Theft is a zero-sum resources game so long as resources are perishable.
Libertarians are okay with mass death from air and water pollution. They would have been horrified by John Snow vandalizing the pump handle.
And lefties are okay with mass death from poverty brought on by massive armed-theft while worshiping their 'sky is falling down' religion/excuses and calling every robbery ?charity?.
Businesses are allowed to focus on select customers to maximize their profits while government is obligated to serve all.
Is that what you call it when politicians write bills to benefit select campaign donors? Ever heard of regulatory capture?
Government is often tasked with providing services to groups that businesses don’t want to serve.
Is that what you call it when police refuse to answer calls to certain neighborhoods, or arrest the people who ask them for help because fuck you that’s why?
Also, because government uses public money it often has obligation to report and make decision based on the use of that money.
Which they often don’t do because fuck you that’s why.
People complain about airlines all the time, but few go out of business.
Because they’re select constituents that get bailed out with taxpayer money whenever they get close to failing.
As far as competition goes, when governments compete it’s called war.
Oops, this is meant as a reply to Moderation4ever.
I actually agree with many of the things you say. I see business and government as two different things that cannot be easily compared. I do agree that government at its worst is when it is propping up businesses. Bailouts for failing businesses, changing regulations to suit businesses, hiring out services that should be done by government, and paying for sport arenas.
I agree that government and business are not easily compared.
Businesses rely upon people voluntarily giving them money in exchange for something of value that they produce.
Governments produce nothing of value rely upon coercion to force people to give it money in exchange for not being locked up in a cage or killed.
Businesses use price signals to determine what products are good and which are bad.
Government doesn’t have any feedback mechanism so it can’t know what is effective and what is not.
The worst thing that someone in business can do to you is sell you something that doesn’t work, and they can be charged with a crime.
The worst thing government can do to you is murder your entire family in front of you before murdering you, and nothing else happens.
^BINGO +10000000000 Well Said.
Governments produce nothing of value...
Government doesn't produce goods itself, but it does provide a lot of services that have value. It also contracts for private companies to provide goods and construct things of value. It shouldn't be hard for anyone to come up with a list of things that they value that government provides, and that only government could provide.
Government doesn’t have any feedback mechanism...
Even Stossel and the economist he interviews, Stringham, admit that voting is a feedback mechanism. They just minimize the effectiveness of elections as feedback. (Which is true, if not for the reason Stringham gives.)
The worst thing that someone in business can do to you is sell you something that doesn’t work, and they can be charged with a crime.
Who would be charging them with a crime, I wonder? Could it be . . . government? There is one thing government provides that has value right there.
Although, for that to be a crime, I would imagine that the business would have to have deliberately and knowingly sold you something defective, at a minimum. If it wasn't intentional and only that QA failed, they'd probably just have to replace it with one that works or give you a refund.
"It also contracts for private companies to provide goods and construct things of value"
Hows that .... Slave Labor-Camps?
Your premise is still that of slavery because you're not recognizing where the 'value' actually is.
Government contracts for construction and maintenace of infrastructure. My city has a limited amount of snow removal equipment. Most of the city's vehicles are tasked with keeping the main thoroughfares open. Many of the residential street, including my own, are cleared by contractors working for the city. While the city crews may fill in potholes, road construction is contracted out.
but, but, but .... Roadzzzzzzz.. /s
The topic has what ... about 0.000001% to with Roadzzzzz.
Never-mind the funding is charged at the fuel pump.
And somewhere sally is washing a dish and broke it at her job so of course that's why all waitresses need to be shot!!! /s
"the funding is charged at the fuel pump"
That is called a tax. Coercion. And taxes are used for a lot of other purposes.
'coercion' for a lot of other purposes is exactly the issue.
Especially when it's 'coercion' for wealth distribution (i.e. armed-robbery)
"Government doesn’t have any feedback mechanism "
In theory, Government in the USA has the "free" press holding them accountable, and has access to opinion polls taken by political parties and media organizations as well as "think tanks" and other NGOs. Also, Senators in some states actually have competitive races (and in other states occasionally have a semi-competitive primary) and there's still a handful of US House districts which haven't been gerrymandered to be safe for candidates of a certain party and/or race (a practice which is either illegal or required under the "Voting Rights" Act, depending on the particular circumstance and the latitude of the district in question).
Our government has plenty of feedback mechanisms, they just face absolutely no consequences as a result of ignoring those in most cases. It probably doesn't help much that the most measurable differences between the two "viable" parties at this point are limited to "culture war" issues which are considered to be of high importance to only about 25-30% of eligible voters, but on the issues which could lead to any meaningful change happening there's either barely a visible gap between their actions or they're unable/unwilling to do anything differently than their "opposition".
With the media now taking a selective approach to which politicians it "holds accountable" and which ones receive active cover, one of those avenues isn't as reliable as it should be but the bias is well known at this point which blunts its potential to do harm. It could be interesting to see what happens to the NYT, TV networks and CNN if the trump jury in NYC somehow establishes a precedent that suppressing reports which could be embarrasing or otherwise damaging to a particular candidate in an election amounts to criminal "election interference" considering how many provable instances there are in which they've all done the "kill" portion of the Enquirer's "catch and kill" practice on behalf of the Obama, and Biden campaigns.
$10 million dollar Abrams tanks are being pulled out of the battle in Ukraine because they are being damaged or destroyed by $400 fpv drones.
That's because tanks weren't meant to sit still and fire their big guns. Tanks are powerful when they are used how they are designed - to move fast and hit with a lot of firepower. Artillery and missile systems and aircraft dropping bombs can deliver much larger payloads to a target, but nothing can react and move quickly on the battlefield in relatively close quarters and then pack a punch like a tank. To be tough in that environment, it has a lot of armor designed to protect it from ground forces. The top? Not so much.
Drones used like they are being used in Ukraine is a new thing. Ukraine was using those same techniques against Russian tanks well before they got any Abrams from us.
Those $10 million Abrams can still be useful to Ukraine, but they have to be used in the right way.
The use of drones in the Ukraine war is indeed a big change in military tactics. The US military of course will not react property. It is always ready to fight the last war. (The Navy was ready for the Spanish American War. That is the only exception in the entire history of the United States.)
Of course the implied suggestion that the Defense Department should be privatized because it fails audits is ludicrous. Robert McNamara privatized most of its procurement over 60 years ago because he thought that the private sector could produce guns and ships more efficiently. The result was a windfall for defense contractors.
The only tool in governments toolbox is ‘Gun-Force’.
Since ‘Guns’ don’t make sh*t their only asset to humanity is to ensure Individual Liberty and Justice for all. If legislation isn’t aimed at either of those two it is taking away Liberty and being UN-Just.
Gun's are not going to get you ?free? ponies. They are only going to STEAL someone else's. Gun's aren't going to feed you anything but a bullet. They are only going to make SLAVES of someone else who is UN-Justly making your dinner. This whole the 'government' will provide narrative is literally turning government into the biggest armed criminal gang the nation has ever seen. Never-mind it's the exact mentality of slave-camps (i.e. begging the plantation owner to provide the slaves food, shelter and healthcare).
The left is the party of slavery and it shows in everything they do.
Government does occasionally catch a rapists or murderer.
…ensuring the Individual Liberty for those who got rapped or murdered from those who took that Liberty by force.
It’s important to recognize the difference between defensive and aggressive (or should I call that 'progressive' guns). That day the government decides to be the criminal instead of the defense line of criminals.
More often they catch the wrong guy and lock him up while the guilty continue to commit crimes.
Related is government interference in markets, climate mandates and bans.
Reuters had a piece the other day.. arable land and crops in the U.S. is shrinking. It’s now much more profitable for farm/land owners to put up solar panels (the story was Indiana) than grow crops. Another point was that soil erosions or sand weeds from under the panels is seeping onto neighboring farms and creating lower yields on corn, wheat while turning their soil into a weed farm. So, the free market solution would be a class action from neighboring farms for the sand dust? that’s expensive. Eventually they’ll just sell out and put up solar panels.
The government is messing with a global scarce resource arable land/food supply, through mandates, to kick back profits to green new deal solar manufacturers.
Trying Googling "solar grazing". Solar farms are great places to graze sheep. The sheep graze under the solar panels and reduce labor to cut the vegetation. The sheep can then provide either wool or meat.
Does vegetation grow in the dark? You skipped the very reason farmers don’t stick sun-blocking panels over-top their crops.
Needless to say they wouldn't anyways because spending $500,000 for $5,000 worth of electricity is a bad-deal and that is why solar can't make it on it's own and insisters require 'Guns' to make it happen.
Sheep gnaw the grass to the nubs. The grass needs a lot of sunshine and rain to recover. How exactly is that supposed to happen under a panel that blocks the sun and redirects the rain to create rivulets that run off instead of soak in? Sure, sheep get a season or two, but after that the land is fucked. May as well pave it under.
Given the swath of Stossells argument he misses a key element.
"You can't fix socialism".
And [Na]tional So[zi]al[ism] is what this nation has turned into.
The 'fixing' is the restoration of a *real* USA with the very definition (US Constitution) being 'honored' as the Supreme Law of the Land.
Funny I don't see the US government firing all Jews and stripping us of our citizenship, or rounding us up and gassing us. There are indeed a few Trump and De Santis supporters who are actual Nazis but Trump wants to limit gestapo like round ups to people who aren't US citizens. At least for now.
Nor did the German [Na]tional So[zi]alist[s] do that when they first started. Do you think it's okay to conquer the USA for the same governing method as Germany did until the Nazi ideology end-game starts to materialize?
Your kind should be rounded up and exported. You have no purpose of being here except trying to conquer the nation for your Nazi-Empire.
Government is adversarial to freedom by definition.
It one assumes freedom is our natural state, then government can not be "made to work" AND protect freedom.
If one accepts that people need to have a mechanism to deal with those who do not respect other individual's freedom, then one accepts liberty (i.e. freedom, within the bounds of a limited number of laws necessary to insure the greatest freedom for the greatest number, or the inverse [least loss of freedom]) as a tolerable diminuition of freedom. In this case, if government is charged with protecting liberty, it *might* work, if it can be made to stick to that minimal job. Our Constitution was designed to do that, but power grabs by each of the branches has sorely eroded the concept.
Efficiency is a separate matter.
The function of government is to defend liberty which it can be made to do simply by prohibiting it from using coercion.
...and keeping other governments from initiating coercion - hence the very reason the Union of States was created. A strong national defense.
But our Defense Department fails audits. Better to let other countries invade us and take us over.
Humorously; As I just responded to you previously. Exactly why your kind has no reason to even be in the USA. If you don't like the principles of the USA then move-on. There are literally tons of [Na]tional So[zi]alist and Communist nations to pick from just NOT this one.
I can make it work, prohibit government coercion. Proper government holds a monopoly on the retaliatory use of force. It's when government initiates force that it becomes tyrannical. So prohibit it from initiating force and Bob's your uncle.
Define coercion? If the neighbors call the police because you having a loud late-night party is that coercion? If you are speeding in a school zone and the police give you a ticket is that coercion? If you are from a foreign country and you travel to the US and decide to just stay on here is it government coercion for you to be deported? What defines what is and is not coercion.
Initiating force. I said it twice in my original comment.
In all the examples I have given government has initiated force. In the first case it has stopped your party and can jail you for failure to comply. In the second case it has taken money from you and can take you driving privileges should you fail to comply. In the third case you are deported. How are any of these not a initiation of force.
No those are deterrence which means stopping you from doing something. It's retaliatory force.
Why do you keep using minuscule examples when everyone knows they are not the subject at hand? You are like that bank-robber who steal billions and shows up in court and says I just picked a penny from the penny jar.
So what is bright line between things acceptable for government to do and things not acceptable? You violate a traffic rule the government fines you, you violate an environmental law the government fines you. It is same principle just a matter of scale. The fact is we have had government for as long as recorded history. The principles of government have been the same throughout history. Government provides services and laws. Government extracts taxes to pay for the services and punishes those not obeying the laws. To get rid of government you who have to go back to a hunter gather existence.
I am surprised that more libertarians don't emigrate to Somalia. It basically doesn't have a government any more.
That's what makes it a terrible place. Government is the means by which we place the retaliatory use of force under objective law.
It's unacceptable for government to initiate force because it's unacceptable for ANYONE to initiate force. Coercion is immoral, it's a violation of our natural right as sapient beings to liberty.
The only "Government provides services" a *real* USA government should provide is ensuring Individual Liberty and Justice for all.
'Guns' don't make sh*t. The only thing that ?use-to? separate the USA from Russia, Cuba, USSR, Nazi-Germany, China, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc ..... is the USA (defined by the US Constitution) governing pursuit is for Liberty and Justice over 'armed-theft' services.
Why are you morons even in this nation? Just to conquer it for your dreamland Nazi-Empire? There's a whole list of nations just above that fit your criminal governing ideology - MOVE!
He wants totally open borders, no speed limits, no zoning, no public nuisance laws, no police, no prisons.
The essence of government is coercion. Initiating force. And without it we become like Somalia or South Sudan. He should move to one of those countries.
Now which part of those uses of government are equivalent to wealth-distribution literally bankrupting the nation? Never-mind they are all very localized and minuscule examples of what 'government' has become.
Do you think all Biden had done was pass basic speed limits, zoning, nuisance laws, established a police department and a prison? He sure hasn't done any sort of basic governing about securing the border so that's off the list.
Government also retaliates with force. That’s moral. So we just prohibit the coercion and we have Libertopia.
Government really shouldn't be trusted to do anything more than it absolutely has to. We need to get back to treating Washington DC as if it were Homer Simpson when the safety inspectors visit the power plant. Hand Congress a bee in a jar, lead them to the basement and tell them that it's crucial that they not let the bee escape.
After that, if someone sees fit to brick over the door to that basement, that's between them and this pallet of bricks and cement which just got delivered...
"Government really shouldn’t be trusted to do anything more than it absolutely has to."
The problem is different people have different ideas on what government absolutely has to do.
Maybe there is a Supreme Law around here somewhere that spells-out exactly what the US Government "has to do". The USA doesn't need a new definition - it's already been written. It just needs to be honored by patriots instead of conquered by treasonous socialists.