Is Darwin the Best Regulator?

In ye olden days coaches didn't have cruise control, and creative drivers dreamed up their own schemes. Eagles had a hand throttle for fast idling, but you could pull that sucker tight on the highway, and voila… cruise control. It wasn't sensitive to speed, but heck, that's what the governor was for. On GM’s you could wedge a flare between the pedal and the bottom of the dash.

Enterprising Scenicruiser drivers would throw the electric high-idle switch, knowing that it disabled the governor, and allowed for warp-speed.

This all came to a screeching halt (literally and figuratively) when Greyhound configured the high-idle switch to engage the brakes when it was energized. Trailways discontinued the hand throttles… and both severely disciplined employees who messed with safety stuff.

Recently a commuter train took off without it's driver (but WITH 50 passengers), heading towards Boston at a brisk pace. It passed through 4 stations without slowing, until the operations people cut the current and it coasted to a stop. No one was hurt, but imagine what could have happened.

The driver had bypassed safety systems, in an apparent effort to copy OUR crude cruise control, and left the train for what he thought was a brief break, without setting things right.

Bad idea, and he has probably been fired, but an aggressive lawyer and mandatory procedural steps leave the real possibility that he could be re-instated.

In 1871, The US adapted Civil Service regulations. It was an effort to end the “spoils” system where every time there was a political change, politicians completely restaffed the bureaucracy with their supporters. In time, the federal civil service concept was adopted by most state and local governments

Public workers couldn't be dismissed for their politics… in fact, it became difficult to discipline them at all. What has evolved is a constipated culture of compliance with sometimes silly rules.

In the bad old days, a politician who pumped agencies full of their pals… was at least responsible to the electorate if their buddies performed poorly. There was some incentive to get things right.

The current scheme allows lawmakers to throw up their hands and blame the bureaucracy for inability to operate effectively. Has anyone made real progress on the Veterans Administration mess? Are hundreds of teachers in NYC (and elsewhere) paid to sit in empty rooms... deemed unfit to teach, but not quite unfit enough to fire?

In other words, well meaning measures like civil service “protections” often come with serious fallout.

One way to avoid unintended consequences is to reject all change.

Nah…. but let's be more discriminating. Doing nothing is sometimes a good decision.

What we can, and should do… is monitor everything with a brutally honest eye towards what works. When a new concept is effective, embrace it, if flawed fix it and dump the failures.

Good intentions aren't enough. Al Capone saw himself as Robin Hood. Honestly evaluate programs, rather than sticking with flawed ones just because they're well well-intentioned. Unintended consequences are God's way of letting us know that we aren't REALLY that smart.

Concepts that work survive, and hindering Darwin may well tick him off. Ultimately “Charlie” always wins.

A case in point is the current (and growing) regulatory environment, and the FMCSA/CSA ratings system. Rules being made, technology mandated, and “measurements” being used to regulate our industry without certainty that they accomplish anything useful.

Reputable carriers are being squashed, in a misguided (and futile) effort to make a good industry perfect... in the process driving folks back into automobiles (where they may die, but without impacting FMCSA statistics).

When Congress asks questions, bureaucrats often drag their feet because they're convinced they are right and good, bu have little real evidence. Admitting error is anathema. Federal regulators have rejected local court decisions that didn't fit their world view.

It's troubling that most of the folks doing all this “good” have no operating experience in the industry. Their expertise is in manipulating the machinery of government, sometimes imagining, or creating, problems that they then “solve”.

Which brings us full circle (and you thought I was lost). Are the “civil servants” pushing all this stuff willing to put their jobs on the line the way you do?

You get it wrong and you're out… would bureaucrats and regulators submit to objective review of whether their ideas have succeeded? And be fired or disciplined if they don't? Let Darwin work his magic?

Betcha lots of rules would never be implemented if their sponsors were ultimately held responsible for results.

In 1968 a small city in South Viet Nam, Ben Tre was crushed by allied bombing with heavy civilian casualties … prompting a US Major to say 'It became necessary to destroy the town to save it”.

Is that FMCSA's way of “repairing” the motorcoach industry?