🧱 Soapbox: When Bureaucracy Outbuilds Progress

There’s a funny thing that happens when the government decides to “get things done.” It begins with bold headlines, press conferences, and well-written mission statements. Billions of dollars are earmarked, and officials tout innovation, jobs, and progress. The goals always sound noble — revitalize chip manufacturing, expand high-speed internet, rebuild infrastructure. But somewhere between the approval of funds and the actual pouring of concrete, the gears of bureaucracy start grinding.

It’s in that gap — between vision and execution — where good ideas often go to die slow, expensive deaths.

As someone who has spent a career in technical fields, I’ve seen firsthand what happens when government dollars meet real-world projects. Once the checks start rolling, the “strings attached” grow into ropes that strangle efficiency. Layers of paperwork, political conditions, and agency oversight often balloon beyond reason. And in recent years, that’s been amplified by two words that appear in nearly every federal contract: union and DEI.

The Good Intentions Behind the Slowdown

Let’s be clear: the intent behind diversity, equity, and inclusion requirements isn’t inherently wrong. The goal — to make sure opportunity is available to all, to ensure fair pay, and to build workplaces that represent the broader population — is commendable. Likewise, unions have long played a role in protecting worker rights and promoting safety standards.

But the trouble begins when these principles, instead of being guidelines for fairness, become gateways to entry. When every contractor, subcontractor, and even supplier must spend hours navigating mandatory compliance reports, hiring quotas, and certification audits just to bid on work — we’ve stopped focusing on the job and started focusing on the paperwork.

What should be a competition of competence turns into a competition of compliance.

The Union Filter

In many of today’s big government initiatives, from road repair to broadband expansion, contracts increasingly require the use of union labor. On paper, that may sound like a guarantee of quality. In practice, it can severely limit competition and availability.

Many skilled contractors across the country — especially smaller or rural ones — simply aren’t unionized. They’re local firms that have spent years building reputations for reliability, fair pricing, and top-quality workmanship. Yet these same companies often find themselves locked out of federal bids before they even start because they don’t check the “union” box.

What happens next is predictable: fewer bidders mean higher prices. Fewer hands available mean longer timelines. And the projects that were supposed to create opportunities for many end up enriching a select few who know how to navigate the federal maze.

Union labor certainly has its place, but when it becomes a mandate instead of an option, we lose the competitive energy that drives efficiency and innovation.

The DEI Bottleneck

Then there’s the modern layer of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion mandates. Again, the spirit behind them — promoting fairness and broadening opportunity — is hard to argue against. But in execution, the results can be paralyzing.

Large projects like the CHIPS and Science Act, designed to rebuild America’s semiconductor manufacturing capability, are already facing delays not because we lack talent or technology, but because of the mountain of administrative conditions placed on each contract. Companies must now outline exhaustive “DEI implementation plans,” create internal committees, and produce progress reports before shovels hit dirt.

Likewise, the BEAD broadband expansion program — meant to bring fiber-optic internet to every corner of America — has been slowed by approval processes that require every state and contractor to prove diversity outreach and union alignment. In some states, smaller internet service providers have quietly stepped back, unwilling or unable to meet the bureaucratic demands. The irony is painful: programs meant to “expand access” are, in some ways, narrowing the field of who can even participate.

When Idealism Meets Inefficiency

There’s nothing wrong with wanting to build a fairer workforce or safer job sites. But there’s something deeply wrong when those goals make it harder to build anything at all.

Government doesn’t operate like a business — and that’s part of the problem. In business, time is money. Delays hurt margins. Inefficiency has consequences. In government, however, there’s little accountability when timelines stretch or budgets explode. The incentive isn’t to get the job done; it’s to check every box and ensure no headline ever says someone missed one.

By trying to regulate fairness into existence, we’ve unintentionally created a system where even the most well-meaning contractors spend more time in compliance meetings than on actual worksites. Some throw up their hands and walk away. Others pad their bids to cover the inevitable delays and audits. The result? The taxpayer foots the bill — twice.

The Ripple Effects

When major projects slow, it’s not just abstract dollars being wasted. It’s communities waiting longer for high-speed internet. It’s families paying more for energy. It’s towns watching job opportunities disappear before they even materialize.

These policies don’t just affect companies; they affect people. The homeowner still waiting for broadband that was supposed to arrive in 2023. The factory worker watching a chip plant project stall because another contractor withdrew. The small business owner shut out of a contract because his crew wasn’t organized under a union banner.

We should be empowering those willing to build — not burying them under red tape.

A Smarter Way Forward

The solution isn’t to throw out standards, but to streamline them. We can uphold fairness and opportunity without suffocating productivity. Instead of one-size-fits-all mandates, give contractors flexibility to demonstrate competency and commitment in their own ways.

Rather than requiring every project to fit a political checklist, let’s bring the focus back to qualifications, performance, and results. Reward those who deliver quality work on time and on budget — not just those who master compliance paperwork.

And when it comes to union participation, allow open competition. Let union and non-union shops bid side by side. Let the best value win.

Because if our real goal is progress — faster broadband, stronger infrastructure, more manufacturing — then we need every capable hand, not just the ones that fit neatly into the approved categories.

The Bottom Line

At some point, we have to ask: are we more interested in building systems that look good on paper or projects that actually get built?

America’s strength has always come from doers — from people who can design, build, fix, and improve. But every time we overcomplicate the process, we send a quiet message to those people: “You’re not qualified to help unless you can navigate our bureaucracy.”

That’s not progress. That’s paralysis wrapped in paperwork.

If we truly want to lead again in innovation, infrastructure, and technology, we need to start valuing execution over explanation. Because no matter how good our intentions are, a bridge that never gets built won’t carry anyone anywhere.