Rating: 
Summary: Orwell was just a few years early
Review: New York City laws forbidding Mother Theresa from opening a two-story homeless shelter unless she installs an elevator. A 33 page manual describing the qualifications and uses of a hammer. Contract bidding procedures that unintentionally but blatantly encourage corruption.These snippets sound like lines from a Letterman or Leno monologue, but discouragingly they are all actual government dictates documented in this chilling expose. Phillip Howard does an admirable job of identifying the consequences when good-hearted bureaucrats create well-intentioned regulations, and government services get caught in a stranglehold. Perhaps even more bilious than these splenetic monuments to red tape, are the huge work forces of administrators who are imprisoned by this uncontrollable system. Howard employs some macabre humor in redacting the plight of one troublesome government employee who purchased a lawn mower with his own money rather than navigate the labyrinth of paperwork necessary to order a replacement. For this breech of procedure, he earned a formal demerit. Although the subject matter is serious and in deed frequently depressing, Howard often utilizes jocular techniques to make his point. His step by step specifications of NYC's contract bidding ritual would be the envy of any stand-up comic. Unfortunately, the laughing stops upon the realization that this vapid inefficiency is pandemic throughout all levels of our government. It's scary to see just how big Big Brother has become.
Rating: 
Summary: Right on target in every respect.
Review: I use Howard's book as a textbook in several of my introductory Law and Political science courses.Readers from all walks of life can easily relate to his writing style and his essential ideas.Government bureaucrats at all levels of our federal system should read and be questioned about this book as a condition of maintaining their employment.
Rating:
Summary: No longer the Land of the Free
Review: The repetitive, silly prose near the end urging us to break free of the stranglehold of unjust and stupid laws (which we must) can easily be forgiven: this book exposes the arrogance and stupidity which have become "normal" legal proceedings. Like our friend Tacitus said: "The more corrupt the government, the greater number of laws." Message to God: "I will believe in You the instant every leeching lawyer that has contributed to America's current enslavement is struck by lighting!!!"
Rating:
Summary: Law has replaced humanity and process supercedes reason.
Review: Philip Howard's insights help us understand why government appears arbitrary, almost never able to deal with real-life problems in a way which reflects an understanding of the situation. Peppered with pointed anecdotes about absurd regulatory inflexibility and the lack of the use of judgement, Howard's book reveals that we have concocted a system of regulation that "goes too far while it does too little." In the decades since WWII, specific legal mandates designed to keep government in check have proliferated. The result is not better government, but more and poorer government. In a free society, we are supposed to be free to do what we want unless it is prohibited. But highly detailed regulations proscribing exactly what to do turn us toward centralized uniformity, Howard says, where law has replaced humanity. Detailed rules and uniform procedures have nonuniform effects when applied to specific situations. Our old system of common law recognized the particular situation and invited the application of common sense. Common law evolved with the changing times and its truth was relative, Howard tells us, not absolute. But in this century statutes have largely replaced common law, and in recent decades regulations have come to dominate the legal landscape. Howard observes that the Interstate Highway System (still the nation's largest public works program) was authorized in 1956 with a 28-page statute. Now, we attempt to cover every situation explicitly. He cites one contract lawyer who received a proposed definition of the words and/or that was over three hundred words in length. (Let alone the more recent and prominent lawyer who parsed carefully over the definition of what the word "is" is.) Howard traces the growth of this regulatory "rationalism" from Max Weber - the German sociologist at the turn of the century who said that "Bureaucracy develops the more perfectly, the more it is 'dehumanized'" - to Theodore Lowi - who in The End of Liberalism in 1979 saw greater regulatory specificity to be the antidote to special interest groups. But in truth, Howard shows us, the more precise we try to make the law, the more loopholes are created. Centralized rules have caused us to cast away our common sense. Furthermore, "Coercion by government, the main fear of our founding fathers, is now its common attribute. But it was not imposed to advance some group's selfish purpose; we just thought it would work better this way. The idea of a rule detailing everything has had the effect of reversing the rule of law. We now have a government of laws against men." The second section of Howard's book explains how the ritualization of bureaucratic process has brought us to the point where people argue, not about right and wrong, but about whether something was done the right way. He sees the agency as mainly a referee to the process, not a decision maker. He beautifully describes how the bureaucracy surges and falls, en masse, onto a decision. Even Sherlock Holmes wouldn't be able to identify an actual decision maker! The process decided. In this maze of centralized, detailed regulation - a system designed to discourage individual responsibility - many have lost sight of what government is supposed to be doing. Howard argues that process is a defensive device; the more procedures, the less government can do. The paradox is that we demand an activist government while also demanding elaborate procedural protections against government. "The route to a public goal cannot be diverted through endless switchbacks of other public goals, for example, without losing sight of the original destination." He tells us that responsibility, not process, is the key ingredient to action. If responsibility is shared widely, then like the extreme where property is shared widely, it is like there being no responsibility at all. Effective government, Howard suggests, is one which attracts the best people and gives them leadership responsibility. But we have created the opposite system, based on defensive formalisms, driving away good people who cannot abide the negativity of the process. The last section of Howard's book explores the "rights revolution," where government has become "like your rich uncle under your personal control" and everyone now gets to be a part of a legally-mandated, discriminated-against minority. As rights weaken the lines of authority in our society, the walls of responsibility - such as how a teacher manages a classroom - have begun to crumble. We want government to solve social ills, but distrust it to do so. Congress has resolved this dilemma by using rights to transfer governmental powers to special interest groups. The result has not been bringing excluded groups into society, but rather has become the means of getting ahead in society. Howard makes the distinction that, "The rights that are the foundation of this country are rights against law. In James Madison's words, the Constitution provides for 'protection of individual rights against all government encroachments, particularly by the legislature.' Rights - freedom of speech, property rights, freedom of association - were to be the antidote against any new law that impinged on those freedoms." In this way, Howard finds that we have confused power with freedom. These new legislative rights aren't rights at all, no matter how righteous they sound. "They are blunt powers masquerading under the name of rights." He says we need to consider how these new rights impinge on what others consider to be their own freedoms. The flip side of the coinage of the new rights regime is called coercion. Howard suggests that our loathing of government is not caused by its goals, but by its techniques. "How law works, not what it aims to do, is what is driving us crazy." Decision making must be transferred "from words on a page to people on the spot." His book brings us closer to a place where what is right and reasonable, not the parsing of legal language, dominates the discussion. His thoughts shine needed light on the path to common sense and responsibility in government.
Rating:
Summary: it was great
Review: loved it it is tru
Rating:
Summary: Rethinking the Rule of Law
Review: As the author notes in the book, these days it seems we're being ruled by law instead of the reverse. I found the book to be a fantastic and thought provoking read. I've experienced many similar instances of absurdity while threading my way through a frustrating gauntlet of regulatory hurdles in pursuit of the most mundane activities. What I never questioned until now was the basic philosophy of regulation. Human judgment has been removed from the equation. The rules are no longer a few well understood guidelines, they are an incomprehensible morass of instructions with which everyone must comply whether they apply or not. Solving the problem is no longer the goal, the process and its regulations are an end unto themselves. So we have EPA regulations that not only don't make the environment any cleaner, they needlessly make compliance hugely expensive. It's as if the government mandated a multi-billion program for holes to be dug then filled back in. I always knew I was frustrated, but at least I thought all the trouble and expense was necessary. Now I know better. Mr. Howard has neatly identified the problem. Perhaps in a hundred years we'll have implemented his solution.
Rating: 
Summary: Useful arguments, but uneven in style
Review: I agree with the reviewer who concluded that this book is much too long; Howard would have more compelling if he had prepared this as a (long) magazine article. In terms of style, the book is uneven and distracting. Howard overloads the book with anecdote after anecdote of bureaucratic bungling; between the anecdotes are interspersed quotations and the author's somewhat ponderous narrative. Despite the style problems and the excessive length, Howard makes some highly compelling points. He has broken down his subject into to three discrete governmental problems, nicely separated into distinct chapters. The first main chapter is about the 'bureaucrat as bull in a china shop' and government employees' inability to use common sense. This is the weakest chapter- even if all of the author's anecdotes are true, he gives no indication whether bureacrats act like this all the time, half the time, or 1% of the time. One suspects that there are some dedicated government employees out there who occasionally (maybe frequently) display common sense, but Howard gives no inkling that such an employee exists. The second and third main chapters are more compelling, because these chapters deal with systemic problems with the USA government and the legal system. The second chapter concerns the mindless fascination the government has with process and procedure, a truely fascinating commentary on our sclerotic government. The root problem, as the author notes, is that, except at the highest levels of a government, no one is authorized to make a decision. Inevitably, government gets staffed with hacks and drones who are comfortable with that role. Clearly, government will not be 'reformed' until it can operate more like a business enterprise. The third main chapter concerns the proliferation of 'rights' in America. This chapter is likewise compelling; his discussion of the hundreds of billions that America has spent to accomodate the 'rights' of every perceived disadvantaged group in America is less shrill than other tracts on the topic, but still compelling. In general, a worthwhile and educational read.
Rating:
Summary: This Philip K. Howard must be a communist.
Review: The audacity of this character, attacking the United States of America. Everything is perfect here and if your life isn't perfect you should kill yourself. How dare Phillip K. Howard attack the well thoughtout and organized system of judicial law and bureaucratic harmony that myself and others have built up around us. Spend a little less time on your knees and maybe you'll end up like me. Monica Lewinsky spent some time on her knees but now she's going to be a rich and fabulous bore. 46x2
Rating:
Summary: Uncommon Sense
Review: This is a much more concise book than Bovard's "Lost Rights" - and yet makes the point that Bovard fails to: we are lost in a misguided legalism that is not to any person's benefit, except for those bureaucrats whose profession it is navigate the web of laws and regulations we have today in the United States. To find our way again we need to return to simpler a implementation our legal system. Much of our legal system could be boiled down to the Golden Rule. The founding fathers understood this principle when they wrote the U.S. Constitution. The next time you or someone near you says, "There oughta be a law", read or re-read this book. Besides, there probably already are a multitude of laws covering the act you want outlawed - just try to make sense of them.
Rating:
Summary: The Death of Common Sense.
Review: A must for responsible future leaders in all factions of government (civic, local, state, and national) as well as those whom have lost the will to exercise their vote. Phillip Howard goes out of his way to omit emotional triggers, relying on empiricle data to prove his points on everyday events confronting us all. His background as a lawyer, pastor's son, and family man add credibility to this concerned, but calm writer. Anyone feeling alone in America with the fear or confusion of the law and government will enjoy this short but broad-scoped essay of a real and paralyzing problem with our system. Howard goes further to challenge his readers in taking a responsible and brave stance toward recognizing and even dealing with the problem of over-regulation and inequity within the US. DW
| 
