Guest Op-Ed by Paul D. Diaz, MBA. This article was originally published on LinkedIn and is republished with permission.The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of the Winter Springs Community Association.
About Paul Diaz: Mr. Diaz is a Winter Springs City Commissioner, Owner of THE TAX CUTTERY (TM), a Dave Ramsey Trusted Tax Provider, IRS Enrolled Agent, and IRS Certifying Acceptance Agent.
The American fiscal system doesn’t suffer from a lack of revenue—it suffers from a lack of governance. At every level—federal, state, and local—we’re witnessing a troubling trend: performative politics has replaced principled policymaking. Elected officials chase applause, not outcomes. They promise ever-expanding budgets to favored constituencies without meaningful accountability or clear metrics for success. The result is a bloated, inefficient government that increasingly serves itself rather than the people who fund it.
At the federal level, our tax code is a masterclass in dysfunction. Politicians from both parties claim to champion “tax reform,” yet preserve a system so convoluted it punishes productivity and rewards influence. It’s not structured for growth or simplicity—it’s designed to be manipulated.
Despite compelling evidence that strategic tax reductions can increase revenue through economic expansion, elected officials rarely push for real reform. Instead, they make minor tweaks and sell them as significant victories. The problem isn’t insufficient tax revenue—it’s an unwillingness to confront entrenched spending and a political culture that rewards symbolism over substance.
At the state level, property taxes expose another injustice. Politicians claim to protect homeowners but continue to uphold a system that treats them like tenants. Even after paying off their mortgages, Americans risk losing their homes for failing to pay the government its annual dues. That isn’t ownership—it’s a long-term lease from the state. Yet instead of addressing this core violation of property rights, politicians offer gimmicky exemptions and relief programs that only grow the bureaucracy while papering over the core issue.
And nowhere is this pattern more entrenched than in public education. School boards act as autonomous taxing authorities with little connection to performance outcomes. The cycle is familiar: organized interests demand more money, politicians deliver, bureaucracies expand, and outcomes stagnate. Meanwhile, alternative models—charter schools, homeschooling, and education savings accounts—produce better results with fewer resources, but face constant opposition from those who profit from the status quo.
We have to separate respect for service from immunity from scrutiny. It’s become politically convenient to treat certain professions as beyond reproach. But when entire sectors of government spending are placed off-limits to honest evaluation, any call for fiscal discipline is met with outrage: “You must hate teachers. You must want to defund the police. You must not support the troops.”
This rhetorical trap ensures one thing: spending never decreases, programs never end, and no one is ever held accountable.
And here’s the deeper danger: every time a budget passes without scrutiny, every time a failing program is rewarded with more funding, every time a politician gets a standing ovation for saying yes without asking how or why—we inch further into the territory that Senator Padmé Amidala warned of in Star Wars: “So this is how liberty dies… with thunderous applause.”
Across all levels of government, the pattern repeats: find a sympathetic group, promise more funding, build new bureaucracy, avoid any hard questions. Once a program is created, it never dies. It only grows with the political power of those who administer it. Reform becomes nearly impossible because every spending line has a constituency ready to cry foul.
That’s why we need a new approach—one grounded in principle and courage. Every government function should undergo regular, evidence-based evaluation rooted in three core questions: Can costs be reduced while maintaining or improving services? Can efficiency be increased through structural reform? Should this function be transitioned to the private sector?
These aren’t radical questions. They’re common sense. However, common sense is uncommon in a system that rewards emotion over effectiveness. Those who benefit from the status quo will always frame reform as cruelty. They’ll insist that no amount of funding is ever enough. They’ll say only government can do the job—despite the overwhelming evidence that it often can’t.
The choice before us isn’t between compassion and cuts. It’s between a government that grows indefinitely and one that is accountable to the people it serves.
Every dollar spent on bureaucracy is a dollar not spent on direct services. Every unexamined program is an opportunity lost. Every political “win” based on applause instead of analysis undermines real progress.
This isn’t just a federal issue. It’s not just about D.C. It’s about Tallahassee. It’s about Winter Springs. As we approach city budget season, these principles matter more than ever.
Government should be limited, efficient, and transparent. Outcomes, not intentions, should be judged. Public provision should be the last resort, not the default.
The road to reform will be difficult, but the alternative is clear: applause without accountability, spending without scrutiny, and government without limits.