Politics, Administration, and the "New Deal"

The doctrine of prohibition rests on the assumption first that abuses can be eliminated by making them illegal; second, that the abuses themselves are significant and not merely symptoms of underlying forces; and third, that we can automatically achieve good government by eradicating vicious acts. Unfortunately, all these assumptions have fallen down. All the prohibitions with regard to purchases, the handling of funds, the appointment of personnel, the spending of moneys, and discriminations in tax assessments have been found to be utterly worthless when left to stand by themselves. They are of value only when woven into and carried forward by positive administration. Their legal status is of minor significance. We have discovered also that good organization and up-to-date systems of fiscal and administrative control are far more effective than all the criminal statutes in the world in dealing with tax collectors, treasurers, assessors, meter readers, license collectors, and the custodians of supplies. Many times what is needed is not the prohibition of an act, but simply a change in the distribution of work so that the corrupt act becomes impossible. But the greatest fallacy is the belief that the elimination of crime will give us good government-that sterility and virility are synonymous. Perhaps we can by prohibitions and checks and balances make a government that is virtually powerless to go wrong because it is powerless to go at all. But surely that is not the objective of mankind today. It would seem, therefore, that prohibition does not offer us a way to salvation.