That's Not What We Meant to Do: Reform and Its Unintended Consequences in Twentieth-Century America by Gillon, Steven M. (2001) Paperback

by Steven M. Gillon

Historian Steven M. Gillon, host of the History Channel's HistoryCenter program, examines how the law of unintended consequences has left its mark on the politics of welfare, mental health, affirmative action, immigration, and campaign finance. On immigration, for example, Gillon describes how a 1965 law to revise admissions procedures wound up opening the floodgates. Senator Ted Kennedy promised the law "will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area, or the most overpopulated and economically deprived nations of Africa and Asia." Yet that's pretty close to what actually happened. The huge numbers of immigrants entering the United States today--close to a million legal newcomers annually, and most of them from Asia or Latin America--are a direct result of this reform. And there are many other such examples of good intentions gone awry. As he writes in his introduction, "Congress frequently passes bills that it does not fully understand, that cannot be enforced with any precision, and that are full of loopholes begging for court challenges and conflicting interpretations."

As Gillon points out, conservatives often argue against government programs by citing the law of unintended consequences, though he believes this approach to be somewhat limiting: "At the heart of the problem of unintended consequences in the United States is a paradox: Americans look to Washington for solutions to complex problems, but they are reluctant to give government the power it needs to address most issues." Later, he adds, "I would not want readers to conclude from these examples that we must abandon our efforts to identify social problems or suspend efforts to use government as a positive force for social change." It's not clear all readers will come away from That's Not What We Meant to Do in agreement--some may begin to think a "do-nothing Congress" might be a good thing--but they'll certainly learn to expect the unexpected. Consider this a public-policy version of Edward Tenner's book Why Things Bite Back. It should be required reading on Capitol Hill. --John J. Miller

Genres: Nonfiction

Paperback

First published May 1, 2000

Reviews

[Gina · Rating 2 out of 5]

The author started by writing an article, and because it was fun to write and people liked it, he wrote the book. The amusement that the process took for him may explain why the book does so much of random quoting without context, and ultimately a sad lack of profundity. It's not that there is no insight at all, but it could have been much more.

My biggest lesson was probably in talking about welfare legislation, it is revealed that part of why it didn't work as intended was that the existing need was much greater than anticipated. That often led to anger from opposing parties, though that is not a helpful response.

And that is the thing that is missing most of all: good analysis of the opposing forces and their motivations, and the role that plays in difficulty moving forward.

The other thing that seems worth noting in the chapter on campaign finance reform was that while the loopholes had an educated public in mind, they were probably trying to solve the wrong problem anyway, as the high spending levels do not make anyone more educated.

[Belston Campfield · Rating 5 out of 5]

"We got into this with the best of intentions..."

[Jeffrey Williams · Rating 5 out of 5]

Steven M. Gillon's study should become a "classic work" in short order as he gives us five key case studies where the intent behind the policies of campaign finance reform, immigration, civil rights, mental health and welfare were sound, but the practical application of these five acts has done anything but what they were intended to do.

Gillon's narrative is well-researched and balanced. He does not take sides with either the Republicans or Democrats but presents a balanced approach to understanding the issues from both points of view. The neutral tone in a political book is a goldmine as readers from both political persuasions will get something out of this.

I think an unintended consequence of this book is a damnation of the Lyndon Johnson Administration for rushing their plans through Congress without considering the long-term implication. All five of the Acts had some connection to the Johnson Administration, including the campaign reform act of 1974, since the founder of Common Cause was a former Johnson Administration official. My conclusion from this book is that the "Great Society" programs were not so great after all.

[Jim Dressner · Rating 4 out of 5]

You'd expect a book on 20th century history of liberal social policies to be boring, but this well-written book traces the flow of ideas, politics and consequences with a pleasant brevity and a clear focus on important details. Surprisingly readable and good for getting an overview of how we arrived at the current state. Chapters cover topics like welfare, affirmative action, political campaign financing, and others.