Over at CNN, Julian Zelizer has a piece in which he explains why Republicans have to rethink their desire to cut spending by the federal government. According to Zelizer, in 1995 when the federal government shut down, the GOP got the blame because parks were closed and getting a passport became impossible. Even though the public is not concerned now about the upcoming sequestration, according to Zelizer there will be nationwide upset once the terrible cuts kick in.
I think Zelizer somehow missed the memo that explains what sequestration actually is. Spending is still going up; the only thing to be cut is the rate of increase. Everything that the government could afford last year, it can also afford this year.
I have made this point repeatedly on this blog, but Zelizer's reference to people experiencing difficulties in obtaining a passport brought me back to the last time I went through that process. let me describe that model of government efficiency.
My passport had four months left until expiration, so I went online to find the closest passport office. There had been one in Stamford, Connecticut years earlier that I had used. The State Department website told me that I could obtain my passport at the Post Office, so there was no need anymore to go all the way to a State Department facility. That sounded great, so my wife and I got all the materials that we needed according to the list online and went to the post office in our town that was designated as the one where one could obtain a passport. I even checked online to see if there were particular times for seeking a passport and found out that they were available only in the afternoons from 1-3 pm. We arrived at 12:50 in order to avoid any lines and went to the window to ask where one obtained a passport (there were no signs). After waiting for five minutes to get to the front of the line, we reached a nice elderly lady who told us that we were too early to get a passport. We were further told that we could only obtain the passport after 1:00 pm. She also pointed us to a corridor where there was a window that would be used for passport business. We thanked her and went to the appointed spot.
Sure enough, at 1:00, the passport window opened for business. The same elderly lady who had spoken to us at the other window now was at the passport window. We were the only ones in line, and the elderly lady asked if she could help us. I again explained that we wanted to renew our passports. The immediate response came from her that it did not seem that we had an appointment, so she could not help. I was somewhat surprised, but I pointed out that there was no one else there and asked whether she could just help us since we were already there. The answer was no. It seemed strange, but I know better than to fight in such situations. I asked the woman if we could make an appointment. She told us that appointments were only available by phone more than three days in advance. I asked for the phone number and also whether there were any particular times when calls for appointments had to be made. To my amazement, she actually gave me the number and told me when to call. We then left.
The next day, I called to get an appointment. I cannot tell for certain, but I think that the call was forwarded to the same woman who had helped us (or more precisely not helped us) at the post office. She gave us an appointment for two weeks later. When the appointed date and time came, my wife and I appeared at the post office. We had to wait for a half hour while the passport applications of people ahead of us were handled. Finally, we were next and the same woman appeared at the window. The entire process took about 5 minutes to complete. After that, we had to wait for weeks until the new passports appeared in the mail.
The point of the story is this: the 5 minutes of processing time could easily have been handled on our first visit to the post office. Instead, we were forces to make two trips rather than one, to wait for almost three weeks to complete the process instead of 5 minutes, and to waste more than an hour of our time in the associated run around that came with the application process.
I don't really care what Julian Zelizer at CNN thinks. That process could not get worse.
I think Zelizer somehow missed the memo that explains what sequestration actually is. Spending is still going up; the only thing to be cut is the rate of increase. Everything that the government could afford last year, it can also afford this year.
I have made this point repeatedly on this blog, but Zelizer's reference to people experiencing difficulties in obtaining a passport brought me back to the last time I went through that process. let me describe that model of government efficiency.
My passport had four months left until expiration, so I went online to find the closest passport office. There had been one in Stamford, Connecticut years earlier that I had used. The State Department website told me that I could obtain my passport at the Post Office, so there was no need anymore to go all the way to a State Department facility. That sounded great, so my wife and I got all the materials that we needed according to the list online and went to the post office in our town that was designated as the one where one could obtain a passport. I even checked online to see if there were particular times for seeking a passport and found out that they were available only in the afternoons from 1-3 pm. We arrived at 12:50 in order to avoid any lines and went to the window to ask where one obtained a passport (there were no signs). After waiting for five minutes to get to the front of the line, we reached a nice elderly lady who told us that we were too early to get a passport. We were further told that we could only obtain the passport after 1:00 pm. She also pointed us to a corridor where there was a window that would be used for passport business. We thanked her and went to the appointed spot.
Sure enough, at 1:00, the passport window opened for business. The same elderly lady who had spoken to us at the other window now was at the passport window. We were the only ones in line, and the elderly lady asked if she could help us. I again explained that we wanted to renew our passports. The immediate response came from her that it did not seem that we had an appointment, so she could not help. I was somewhat surprised, but I pointed out that there was no one else there and asked whether she could just help us since we were already there. The answer was no. It seemed strange, but I know better than to fight in such situations. I asked the woman if we could make an appointment. She told us that appointments were only available by phone more than three days in advance. I asked for the phone number and also whether there were any particular times when calls for appointments had to be made. To my amazement, she actually gave me the number and told me when to call. We then left.
The next day, I called to get an appointment. I cannot tell for certain, but I think that the call was forwarded to the same woman who had helped us (or more precisely not helped us) at the post office. She gave us an appointment for two weeks later. When the appointed date and time came, my wife and I appeared at the post office. We had to wait for a half hour while the passport applications of people ahead of us were handled. Finally, we were next and the same woman appeared at the window. The entire process took about 5 minutes to complete. After that, we had to wait for weeks until the new passports appeared in the mail.
The point of the story is this: the 5 minutes of processing time could easily have been handled on our first visit to the post office. Instead, we were forces to make two trips rather than one, to wait for almost three weeks to complete the process instead of 5 minutes, and to waste more than an hour of our time in the associated run around that came with the application process.
I don't really care what Julian Zelizer at CNN thinks. That process could not get worse.
No comments:
Post a Comment