Good Governance Is Based on Facts, Not Rhetoric

Good Governance Is Based on Facts, Not Rhetoric

In an era of unprecedented access to information, the quality of governance now depends more than ever on a commitment to truth, data, and transparency. Good governance isn’t about charisma, catchy soundbites, or partisan appeals — it’s about the disciplined use of facts and evidence for the public good. As public institutions face complex challenges — from healthcare and housing to climate change and digital equity — leaders who base their decisions on verifiable data rather than political theatrics are best positioned to deliver effective and fair outcomes.

The Dangers of Rhetoric Over Reality

Governance driven by rhetoric often replaces evidence-based reasoning with emotional appeals. While it may be politically convenient to target abstract "others" or to assign blame with dramatic language, this method erodes public trust in institutions. It masks the true causes of social issues. For example, exaggerated claims about welfare fraud or misrepresentations of marginalized groups tend to spread despite lacking statistical support. Such narratives skew policy priorities and shift focus away from systemic reforms that could deliver long-term benefits.

Research shows that misinformation in policymaking can cause negative outcomes, increased polarization, and a decrease in institutional legitimacy (Lewandowsky, Ecker, & Cook, 2017). When political figures focus on narratives instead of evidence, resources are wasted, vulnerable groups are harmed, and the root causes of societal problems remain unaddressed.

Evidence-Based Policy as a Pillar of Good Governance

Proper democratic governance relies on accountability, inclusivity, and rational decision-making. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) highlights that evidence-informed policymaking enhances transparency and trust by aligning decisions with verifiable results (OECD, 2020). Whether developing a municipal broadband program, implementing public health protocols, or assessing criminal justice reform, leaders who gather, analyze, and base actions on accurate data are more likely to achieve a clear, positive impact.

Cities that adopt data-driven budgeting and performance metrics—such as New York City’s Mayor’s Office of Data Analytics or Los Angeles’s Open Data platform—report increased efficiency, higher citizen satisfaction, and better cross-departmental collaboration (Goldsmith & Kleiman, 2017). These methods use dashboards, KPIs, and predictive analytics to focus on high-need areas, track program performance, and cut wasteful spending.

Data Builds Trust

Using transparent, publicly accessible data in decision-making isn't just good practice; it's a democratic necessity. In a time when trust in institutions is declining, data can act as a neutral common ground. When governments openly explain the evidence behind their decisions, they build legitimacy, empower communities, and boost civic engagement. On the other hand, relying on unverifiable stories or politically convenient misrepresentations damages trust and hampers problem-solving.

As Pew Research Center found, citizens are more likely to trust the government when they believe decisions are made fairly and based on objective evidence rather than special interests (Rainie, Keeter, & Perrin, 2019).

Case Study: The 2025 Trump Administration and the "Big Beautiful Bill"

Under the 2025 Trump administration, the so-called "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" became law— notably extending the 2017 tax cuts— but at the expense of significant reductions in Medicaid and SNAP. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that these Medicaid cuts— triggered mainly by strict work requirements and administrative verifications— could decrease federal Medicaid funding by about $793 billion over ten years, potentially leaving 10.9 million Americans uninsured by 2034 (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2025).

Critics argue that these provisions significantly cut coverage to fund tax breaks for the wealthy and immigration enforcement costs, rather than addressing fraud or waste (KFF Health News, 2025). Despite the White House’s claims that the reforms protect Medicaid, the CBO and independent analysts estimate that the same work mandates and reporting rules will cause millions to lose coverage, even though most adults on Medicaid are already employed or unable to work (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2025).

States like Arkansas previously lost 18,000 recipients after implementing similar work rules, with no corresponding increase in employment (KFF Health News, 2025). Research consistently shows that most Medicaid recipients are employed, attending school, or caring for dependents, and only a small number choose not to work (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2025).

The rhetoric used to defend this legislation heavily relies on stereotypes, such as claims that "35-year-olds playing video games in basements" are abusing Medicaid. These depictions lack supporting evidence and distort the public's understanding of who benefits from safety net programs. As Lewandowsky et al. (2017) warn, such "post-truth" policymaking can have harmful consequences when it replaces data with narrative.

Toward a Data-Driven Polity

The path forward is clear. Public leaders, civil servants, and voters alike must demand policies based on verified facts, not ideology, partisan spin, or performative outrage. This includes:

• Requiring cost-benefit analysis and independent evaluations of major programs.

• Supporting open data legislation and transparency platforms.

• Promoting data literacy education for both officials and the public.

• Holding elected leaders accountable for factually incorrect or misleading statements.

Good governance isn't about winning arguments—it’s about delivering results. Those results come not from slogans, but from science, facts, and the disciplined pursuit of truth.

References

Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. (2025). Tracking Senate action on the tax and budget reconciliation plan. Retrieved from https://www.cbpp.org

Goldsmith, S., & Kleiman, N. (2017). A new city O/S: The power of open, collaborative, and distributed governance. Brookings Institution Press.

Kaiser Family Foundation. (2025). A closer look at the Medicaid work requirement provisions in the "Big Beautiful Bill". Retrieved from https://www.kff.org

KFF Health News. (2025). Too sick to work: Some Americans worry Trump’s bill will strip their health insurance. Retrieved from https://kffhealthnews.org

Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K. H., & Cook, J. (2017). Beyond misinformation: Understanding and coping with the "post-truth" era. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 6(4), 353–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2017.07.008

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2020). Building capacity for evidence-informed policymaking: Lessons from country experiences. OECD. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/governance/skills-evidence-informed-policymaking.pdf

Rainie, L., Keeter, S., & Perrin, A. (2019). Trust and mistrust in Americans’ views of scientific experts. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2019/08/02/trust-and-mistrust-in-americans-views-of-scientific-experts/

Russo, M. (2025, June 16). 16,000 deaths tied to Medicaid cuts in GOP budget bill, study warns. STAT. Retrieved from https://www.statnews.com/2025/06/16/medicaid-cuts-new-analysis-16-thousand-deaths-millions-uninsured-from-big-beautiful-bill/