More on the BMV's problemsWhen I complained, in passing, about the problems with the new BMV computer system, it hadn't ocurred to me that it might be a deeper problem than me just having a bit of a whine. However: [T]he public is justifiably outraged -- because the computer upgrade has been so badly mishandled. BMV officials knew that problems might arise when the switch from the old computer system to the new was made because the agency failed for years to keep accurate records on motorists. With the new system, long-existing discrepancies involving a driver's address or Social Security number began to finally crop up, making a trip to a license branch a necessity ... [T]he BMV did little to warn Hoosiers of the potential problems ... Launching a complicated database is almost certain to trigger problems. However, the agency's failure to communicate compounded those errors and reinforced in ordinary Hoosiers' minds the perception that the BMV is hopelessly incompetent. Quite. Commissioner Silverman thinks they "didn't do as well as the customer expects" - actually, the most damning indictment is that if you'd asked a random sampling of Hoosiers, before this project began, whether they thought the BMV would mess up its new technology roll-out, I wouldn't be surprised if every one said they expected it. Sadly, the bar for "as well as the customer expects" in the BMV's close is pretty low - this kind of failure of execution is expected and assumed with resigned indifference.
Worse yet:[This] new glitch-ridden computer system is hindering police across the state, making it difficult for officers to reliably pull up accurate records on drivers ... [Police] say they are likely to let free those who otherwise might be arrested for driving with a suspended or revoked license ... Indianapolis Police Capt. Greg Bieberich ... said the computer problem has compromised public safety because officers can't make arrests when perhaps they should. In certain situations, Bieberich also has advised officers to no longer detain people based on BMV information that normally would prompt an arrest. "We should consider that information unreliable unless we can verify it," he said. "And if they can't verify, then they shouldn't write the violation." Crazy!
The IndyStar seems to be targetting Commissioner Silverman, but the problem isn't really Joel Silverman, and so the solution isn't firing him. Nor is the solution to simply give up on the new system; again, the problem isn't the move to the new computer system, the problem is the way it's been handled, and it's the underlying cause of that problem that must be addressed. The solution is actually very simple. The Governor apparently thinks that "training is the main issue." He is wrong. The main issue is that the BMV is universally regarded as - at best - incompetent, surly and frankly, beyond hope. The main issue is that it needs to be privatized, whereafter a company with its attitude - shorn of its monopoly protection - will either buck its ideas up, or sink without trace. You can fire as many Commisioners as you like, and throw as much money as you like down the black hole of new databases, but the problem isn't going to be fixed while the day-to-day operation of the BMV is still run by the government. In this case, as it often is, "government is not a solution to our problem, government is the problem." I would think that a Republican administration would understand that, Mitch.
A reason not to privatize the BMV fails to appearOne of the more intemperate posts I've floated here (see The BMV must die, 8/31/05) stemmed from frustration at the astonishing incompetence of the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, in response to which, I did what I imagine all Republicans do when confronted with government ineptitude: declared that it ought to be privatized.
Well, yesterday, I had to swing by the BMV to renew my plates; they had sent me a letter saying how much I owed, so I assumed it was a simple matter of walking in and giving them the money. Not so: apparently, they needed to recreate the invoice in their computer system, and the computer system refused to spit out the same number. Sympathizing, I told the representative the story that led to my previous intemperate post about the BMV, to which the representative replied "oh, privatizing the BMV would be the worst thing that could be done!" Marvellous, I thought! I don't mind being wrong, so I am always happy to be corrected, and thought that here was a chance for someone to tell me the crucial argument I'd overlooked in rashly calling for privatizing the BMV. And here it is, the argument against privatizing the BMV: "we'd all be working for minimum wage, and we'd be lucky if we got any benefits at all."
Big government is a self-sustaining philosophy; the more people work for the government, the more people will (perfectly understandably) vote against changes that they think might jeopardize their job. None-the-less, the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles employs 1,657 people, n1; there are 5,210,000 registered drivers in Indiana, n2. I don't want to sound callous, but even if one accepts the (surely questionable) assertion that privatization would necessarily be detrimental to the interests of the BMV staff, and sets aside the interest that even non-drivers have in the efficient operation of government, this is not a hard equation to balance.
Is this really it? Is there really no better argument against privatization of this notoriously inefficient chunk of government than reflexive fear of change? If so, why hasn't it been done yet?
.....................
Footnotes:
The BMV must dieNo kidding. It's time to figure this bureau of motor vehicles thing out once-and-for-all.
Two months ago, we took in my drivers license to change the address on it (we'd dragged our feet since moving last august). They issued a paper license good for sixty days and said the plastic license would follow in the mail. Sixty days arrives, no plastic license. So I call them and say "what's going on?". They say I have to come down to their office so they can call Indianapolis to figure out what's going on. Which is preposterous in and of itself, because there was NOTHING they did once I got there which physically required my presence, but that's another issue (let's call it "prosecution's exhibit B" and get back to exhibit A).
So having forced me to waste time and gas driving down there, they determined that the paper license did indeed expire yesterday, and therefore I am not currently legal to drive. The good news is that the plastic license was mailed yesterday - a full two months after it was submitted. If I'm lucky, it might already be sitting in my mailbox. No, we can't give you any advice as to whether you need to call a cab to get home or whether you should be okay to drive, and no, you can't leave your vehicle in our carpark until we have figured out the difference between our arse and our elbow and issued your plastic license.
So fuck the BMV. Privatize them. Right now. We have a Republican governor in Indiana, and both houses of the state legislature are dominated by Republicans. Republicans aren't supposed to be keen on big incompetant goverment buraecracies, so here's their chance to do something truly radical. Seriously, Mitch - do you want your sole legacy, the only thing you did for which you're remembered, to be that you put Indiana onto daylight savings time? Jefferson doubled the land area of the United States; Lincoln saved the Union for breakfast and abolished slavery for lunch. Daniels changed the time by one hour for six months of each year? Underwhelming. C'mon, do something worthwhile.
Here's how it could work:
I work in the internet industry. When you buy a dot com, you have a choice of companies - called registrars in ISP nomenclature - from whom to buy them. Obviously, there's only one dot com namespace, though, just as there's only one pool of drivers license numbers. So what happens is, the dot com namespace is managed by an entity called Verisign (again, in ISP lingo, they run the parent zone DNS). Verisign set minimum standards for registrars and accredit registrars meeting those standards, like BulkRegister and Network Solutions. They let registrars take all the decisions about how they're going to run their affairs, and so the only interaction between the registrar and the parent zone is a standard interface through which they transact domain registrations: Bulkregister will tell Verisign, please reserve this domain name to this client using these name servers.
So that maps perfectly to our situation with the BMV. It's real simple. You have a state agency which is responsible for setting standards for, and duly accrediting, any private company which wants to be able to process drivers licenses. Companies which meet the standard, and which can pass an annual re-evaluation (and the directors of which don't mind facing stiff penalties and jail time if found guilty of malpractice in breach of their license) can set up as many offices as they like in as many cities in the state as they like. The ones which have competant, fast and innovative procedures will have happy customers; the ones who don't will fail, and their customers will go to others.
Here's the really clever part, though: if you disagree with me, and you think that the BMV is actually doing a sterling job under very difficult circumstances, I'm not saying we should abolish the official state BMV. Clever, eh? As long as they can meet certification standards, they should be allowed to compete too. If I'm wrong, and they really are competant, they'll be fine. If I'm wrong...Well, problem solved. See my description above of the fate of accredited license agencies who do not have competant, fast and innovative procedures.
|
|
