One of the distinguishing — er, what’s the opposite of “distinguishing”? — extinguishing features of Mitt Romney’s candidacy is his lack of specifics. He’ll cut spending, but he won’t say how. He’ll close tax loopholes, but refuses to say which ones. He’ll project “leadership” on the world stage, but can’t really give a coherent explanation. I think he thinks it means jutting his jaw forward and gazing heavenward like the Prophet Nephi, depicted at right. (Mormon prophets, unlike the Hebrew Bible variety, spent a lot of time in the gym.)

And, of course, there’s his tax returns. Still haven’t seen ’em.

Well, our own Randy Brock seems to have a Mitt Romney problem, revealed in this week’s gubernatorial debate sponsored by the Freeploid. Brock has called for cutting the size of state government, which triggered the following exchange:

“So you aren’t going to tell us where you are going to make the cuts?” Shumlin asked.

“I’m not going to tell you, absolutely not,” Brock answered.

Just like Romney. Brock wants us to elect him, and then he’ll figure out where to cut. He plans to rely on that moldy Republican artifice, “zero-based budgeting,” which I suspect is an entirely mythical creature like Sasquatch; and something he likes to call “force ranking,” in which the importance of all government functions would be ranked. By force, ahem. With the lowest ones, presumably, getting the ax.  

Y’know, to some extent — a very limited extent, mind you — this opacity is somewhat understandable when it comes from Mitt; after all, he’s never run the federal government or even been involved in it. (Well, except for when he staged a big-time raid on the public purse to save the Salt Lake Olympics.)

But Randy? He’s been a state Senator. He’s been Auditor, for crying out loud; the one person who ought to know some of the soft spots in state government. Even if you cut him some slack for not having a complete, detailed plan, he ought to have a few good ideas. But…

“I’m not going to tell you, absolutely not,” Brock answered.

Really? Really? Not even one little cut?

The problem with zero-based budgeting and force-ranking and all that “run government like a business” codswallop is that it don’t work in real life. For one thing, just about all government functions are crucial to some and irrelevant to others. For another, many government functions are deliberately inefficient; there are always (or there should always be) more firefighters and EMTs than you absolutely need, and the road crews have to be tooled up for the worst storms.

For yet another, government functions are inherently political and subject to political pressures. That’s why Congressional efforts to limit or ban earmarks have always failed. And that’s why, when Republicans talk about what to cut in the federal budget, they always start with public broadcasting and foreign aid. The easy stuff.

(Although in 1995, Newt Gingrich found out the hard way that a lot of conservatives are fans of public broadcasting. He’d promised to cut CPB funding in the Contract With America, but as it turned out, plenty of rural residents depend on their public TV and radio. Congress backed off.)

Anyway, back to the main point. Randy Brock packages himself as an experienced hand with a sharp eye for detail. But when it comes to streamlining state government, he is absolutely as foggy as Mitt Romney at his worst.

“I’m not going to tell you, absolutely not,” Brock answered.

_________________________

p.s. I confess the wafer-thin pretext for posting a picture of Nephi. But good God, what a hunk! Gotta say this for the Mormons: they don’t cotton to no scabby locust-eating holy men; their prophets were real Amurrican he-men, messengers of a muscular, free-market-promotin’ God.