Rating: 
Summary: Government of the rules, by the rules, and for the rules
Review: Soviet style central planning didn't work because it couldn't think and judge. Strangely we have in the effort to become entirely fair to everyone all the time evoled a system of rules and regulations that defies common sense. No wonder we feel hemmed in and overburdened. Philip Howard, an attorney, explains how this is happening but doesn't seem to have a clearly focused solution. We need a restoration of American democracy and more power to the people. A good place to start is by understanding problems by reading this book.
Rating: 
Summary: Implementing government by the book without reason
Review: Compelled to read this book by the author's appearance at a conference I attended, and having worked for state governmentfor eight years, I heartily recommend it as an eye opener to flawed bureaucracy and the lack of judgment and responsibility which impedes "common sense governing." Wishing to avoid the criticism everpresent in the political environment, bureacrats refer citizens to the text of laws and rules regardless of exceptional circumstances and with an instinctual shoulder shrug, "it's the law..." The examples Philip Howard uses will leave the reader slack-jawed in amazement and in some cases simply outraged (...sure we want Mother Theresa to build a homeless shelter here, but if she can't do it by the book...). The buck rarely stops when no one wants to be held responsible and the operating maxim is "cya." There's defintely more than enough material for additional books eulogizing common sense in governing and Howard's book sets the stage in an impressive fashion!
Rating:
Summary: Great from start to finish.
Review: This is a quick, easy read and I can relate to this book. My parents run a small, family business and we waste so much time and money to try and sort our way through all of this nonsense when we should be coming up with ideas to be more productive. After you read this book, you realize how much of a strain this puts on everyone.
Rating:
Summary: A TEXT BOOK ABOUT NORMATIVISM AGAINST NATURAL PRINCIPLES
Review: This is food for thought, not only for law students, lawyers and practitioners but also for the common citizen. In particular, for all those that get lost in the ill conceived red tape of mother bureaucracy, get stuck in fragmentary and nonsensical regulations. Not only the author provides enough examples of organizational lunacy, due to excess of formalism or elaborate distorsions of clear legal texts and principles, but also gives some insights about possible solutions to the problem of the excessive weight of rules and procedures so precise that no one has the chance to think for himself or find a solution to a problem applying common principles.
As Howard points out: "The sunlight of common sense shines high above us whenever principles control: What is right and reasonable, not the parsing of the legal language, dominates the discussion.With the goal shining always before us, the need for lawyers fades along with the receding legal shadows. People understand what is expected from them."
This is a provocative book written by somebody that has been a practicing lawyer as well as a teacher. These two hats permit the author to better size up the frustrations and limitations that paperwork and stupid regulations inflict upon the citizens.
It should be required reading for law students.
Rating:
Summary: Implementing government by the book without reason
Review: Compelled to read this book by the author's appearance at a conference I attended, and having worked for state government
for eight years, I heartily recommend it as an eye opener to
flawed bureaucracy and the lack of judgment and responsibility
which impedes "common sense governing." Wishing to avoid
the criticism everpresent in the political environment,
bureacrats refer citizens to the text of laws and rules regardless of exceptional circumstances and with an instinctual
shoulder shrug, "it's the law..." The examples Philip Howard uses will leave the reader slack-jawed in amazement and in some cases simply outraged (...sure we want Mother Theresa to build a homeless shelter here, but if she can't do it by the book...). The buck rarely stops when no one wants to be held responsible and the operating maxim is "cya." There's defintely more than enough material for additional books eulogizing common sense in governing and Howard's book sets the stage in an impressive fashion!
Rating: 
Summary: A quick read
Review: I got this book based on the recommendation found in Jaques Barzun's, From Dawn to Decadence. Barzun referred to it in the context of the stifling and dehumanizing effect of bureacractic society on people.While I enjoyed the book I felt the author too often relied upon annecdotes that roused the readers indignation. I was hoping for a more developed exploration of the psychology and philosophy behind the bureaucratic impulse and of the effect it has on culture. Both concepts were addressed upon but never fully developed to my satisfaction. Still, if there is no such exploration available in print this book could start you on your own thoughtful journey... The book is made up of four parts: Legalism -- The idea that we can create a perfect society through perfect laws. This reminded me of the Pharisees of the bible and their desire to achieve righteousness through laws. It didn't work. In fact it annoyed the God they were trying to impress. Process -- The idea that a correct set of procedures and unswerving adherance to them can eliminate human error (or corrupt behavior). This reminds me of the Priest of the bible who thought they were O.K. as long as they stuck with the ritual forms of worship regardless of their internal motivations. Rights -- The idea that personal wants and needs should be elevated to the level of rights. We accept the desire not to made fun of because we are fat as a right which when violated is discrimination. In doing so we undermine the importance of essential human rights -- the right to self determination, freedom etc. Personal Responsibility -- Offered as the antidote (along with a necessary willingness to accept error, risk etc.) I have found the concepts in the book also apply to the corporate workplace. However, that could be simply the reacton of American business to the legal environment. The line is somewhat blurred to me.
Rating: 
Summary: Common sense is over rated
Review: Sorry folks, after reading this book, I must say, "common sense" is over rated, since in appealing to "common sense" we have already formed a general concept of what it means to think.
Rating:
Summary: A great book that describes how the Law hurts
Review: Finally, someone that i agree with, on the ways the law hurts more than does help the citizens in america. Phillip K. Howard illustrates the way the American law is creating more enemies with-in the country than agreeing with what democracy is really about. This book is food for thought, and he makes the evidence more obious. By really getting a point out that "The people's right" is more of a fine print in the constitution. I agree with him how, if people are trying to help other or, themselves, you have to go through a major process in order to do so. How Nuns tried to build a shelter for Homelesss people on a abandoned burned building, but yet couldn't due to new renovation laws that required elevators for any new or renovated building. Homeless don't care for elevators, but warm place to sleep. How in 1993 kids couldn't display artwork on the walls of there school, due to fire hazards, and it is against the law to do so. Where it came up in a holloween presentation. Whatr's worse is how our taxes are paying for a mojor part of cost that the government shouldn't spend on.
What is more interesting in this book is how the government can make situations worse, like the father of eight who turned for the government for help when his kids came out positive for lead poisoning, they told him to paint over it. Yet The city inspectors came in and red tag the house, fined him $1700, and if he didn't strip the house and repaint it, he would be fine more than $8,000. This book is really great for those who know, or have a feeling that the laws here in the USA, are far worse than actually read. Also it is a great book who think that the Law here is the best amd that there is no corruption with the government, or anything wrong with the Government.
Rating:
Summary: Scary stuff!
Review: You must read this book especially in this post 9/11 time. The Patriot Act and other laws like are dangerous in the hands of those power hungery madmen in the Federal Government, and if you don't believe me then you need to read this book.
Rating:
Summary: Good if You Like a Rant (And Who Doesn't?)
Review: The Death of Common Sense, by Philip Howard is a good rant about the short-comings in our present system of government, two large components of which are an enormous bureaucracy and a built-in tendency for litigiousness. Howard does achieve his goal of describing how law is suffocating America, the subtitle of the book. But, as I have already said, this is a rant: one-sided, with few suggestions about how to change government for the better (other than to quit the big bureaucracy and endless litigation). Mr. Howard continually (and rightly) raises the point that our government, while striving to be fair in its actions to everyone, achieves this by accomplishing very little. A fine example provided by the author is the case of a group of nuns that wanted to buy and restore an unoccupied building in New York to serve as a shelter for the homeless. However, a city ordinance requiring that new, multi-story buildings be equipped with elevators pushed the charitable project beyond the practical budget of the nuns. On the one had, it makes sense to plan new buildings with those people that can not easily climb stairs in mind. On the other hand, inflexibly requiring such expensive accommodations puts affordable housing out of the reach of many Americans. It is impossible to please everyone, but the law should allow us to try and please someone! Philip K. Howard makes a strong case, but he does not suggest much in the way of a fix. I found, also, that his views were quite one-sided. If you are someone in favor of big, meddle-some, liberal government, then you probably won't find Howard's arguments that convincing-he'll just sound like some guy with a beef against how his government spends so much time and money to make sure that everyone has the same opportunities. If you are more of a libertarian, then you will probably agree with Mr. Howard and feel more outrage than you already do after reading his numerous anti-overregulation anecdotes. I would have found the book to be much stronger if Howard had tried to build an argument rather than list his complaints from a soap-box.
|
