Public Choice

Delving into these readings proved to be more tedious than our assignments thus far; I found myself re-reading many of the paragraphs.  In The Organization of Government in Metropolitan Areas: A Theoretical Inquiry, the authors suggest that the less common theory on the organization of metropolitan areas, a polycentric political system, is worth further examination.  This is in opposition to a Gargantua political system, which is widely accepted as how most metropolitan areas function or fail to function.

I kept thinking about our discussions in the last few classes regarding what our policy solutions to the many problems we have uncovered would be.  It quickly became clear that identifying the faults and areas in desperate need of change is not the challenge, but rather how to fix them.  I would add here that getting the masses to admit and accept this need for change proves to be equally as difficult.  Regardless, this article offered a system that seeks to keep the power mainly in the hands of the local governments.  Some compromise among areas sharing public services and goods is necessary, but the authors argue that this is better then giving up authority and control to a central government that may not have their hand on the real problems each of these jurisdictions face.

It seems logical but it would require great leadership in each local government, where as the larger system can potentially put great leaders in the central system alone.  Giving up power to the powers that be in each state and nation is often hard for Americans, but as I think of Birmingham, for example, I would rather take my chances on the larger systems in place then in ole Larry Langford.