DThere is a somewhat worn-out truism that says the budget is politics cast in numbers. If that is the case, then the federal government is doing about twice as much politics as it did twenty years ago. Income and expenses continued to rise sharply during this time.

Given these cash cow years, it cannot be said with the best will in the world that the federal government has a revenue problem. Especially not in view of the zero interest profit. The conclusion to be drawn from all this is that good politics should obey a simple principle: less is more.

The recent quarrels over billions no longer available in the federal budget, on the other hand, look like a dispute over a policy that has become hopelessly bogged down. The “austerity plans” of the traffic light coalition, which are withdrawn or corrected almost every week, give the impression that politicians, tied up in numbers, no longer have any leeway.

Save yourself whoever can

The sums involved are puddles compared to the ocean of federal and state politics. However, since in the fight for budgets the focus is not on what is necessary but rather on what is desirable, the desire to shape things is ultimately reduced to client interests. The slogan is not “less is more”, but rather: save yourself if you can.

The farmers were therefore now at a disadvantage (the FDP was once, a long time ago, a farmers' party; the SPD never was; the Greens are only for organic farmers). Citizens' benefit recipients, on the other hand, are in a better position. Politicians themselves show how it works: a position is quickly created in the Bundestag, that of police commissioner.

What does all this mean for the ministerial bureaucracy? It has grown over the past twenty years about as much as the urgently needed and desirable reduction in bureaucracy has been praised from one electoral period to the next.