THIS is the most corrupt budget in history,” my friend Francis B wrote in a post on Facebook, “but does anyone care?”
Now, I’m not exactly sure how accurate the description was of this being the most corrupt budget in history, as I have never really been following the budget process as keenly as maybe I should, but I still have faith in some legislators who I know personally (note: in some, definitely no longer in all of those I know!) so much so that I would like to think that they’d never really allow most corrupt budget in history to pass with their approval if indeed it was the most corrupt.
But I knew the answer to Francis’ question about people caring, and I was quick and perhaps the first to post a reply. And my reply was simple.
No.
People didn’t care much in the past – perhaps with the sole exception of the PDAF brouhaha – and they don’t care much today. And yes that suits the not-so-decent legislators just fine.
But why my quick reply?
The answer lies, I have long contended, in what we can call the “tragedy of the commons.” It is concretized in the reality that when many share in ownership of something, then no one really acts with the care and concern of an owner.
The national budget, which actually consists of funds that include the hard earned taxes you and I pay, is one such example of something owned in common. And because it is owned by all of us in common, not one of us acts the way an owner should act — which is protective if not overly so of every centavo in it that is to be spent purportedly for our benefit.
Let me try to put it another way.
Notice how a person can get so irate if someone picks his pocket and runs away with his wallet, even if the wallet contains a few pesos, even a few thousand pesos. But this same irate person who will wish to throw the book at the pickpocket is far from irate when millions and millions and millions of public funds are lost due to the idiocy, incompetence or criminality of some people in government.
That difference in reaction is a consequence of funds being owned by one person or by the commons in the former instance it’s personal — and the loss at the hands of a thief is personally felt. In the latter instance, the individual whose tax payments are wasted or pocketed no longer feels the same personal connection to the funds that are now part of a bigger aggregate. The connection is no longer personal. And so, even if what is lost in the latter instance is millions and millions upon millions, the individual taxpayer is not so angered as to wish to proceed to the nearest police station to file a complaint.
And this is what works to the advantage of those who understand the budget process and understand the government procurement process — and understand that the scheme called “intelligence funds” is a legislated (and therefore legitimated) way to line your pockets. And so they take advantage of each of our “most corrupt” national budget.
That’s the benefit of public service being a “thankless job.” If you’re wise enough, and not saintly enough, you will easily find the many ways, legally, that you can take to thank yourself while on the job.
Because there’s a tragedy in the commons.
