Voice For Liberty

Tag: Role of government

  • Big government is thoroughly entrenched

    Writing from Orlando, Florida

    The November 16, 2005 Wall Street Journal contains an editorial titled “Fiscal Chicken Hawks.” This article reveals the trivial amounts of federal spending that is being fought over: “The reality is that over the next five years the total federal budget is expected to exceed $13.855 trillion. The Republican faux-Slimfast plan basically erases the rounding error, or the $0.055 trillion, and leaves the $13.8 trillion untouched. To put it another way, the GOP plan reduces the increase in the federal budget by a microscopic 0.25% over the next five years.”

    Faced with even this barely noticeable reduction in spending, advocates of big government are in full fighting trim: “Their Congressional leaders, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, have denounced even these paltry GOP savings as ‘shameful’ and ‘immoral.’ They even brought a dozen Katrina Hurricane victims to Washington, trotted them out in front of the national media, and proceeded to lambaste Republicans for shredding the social safety net.”

    The reality is that federal spending, even under a Republican President and Republican-controlled Congress, has been increasing rapidly, and will probably continue the same way: “For the past five years federal spending on anti-poverty programs has increased by 41%. Medicaid, which provides health care for the poor, is scheduled to grow by 7.9% a year, and under the GOP plan it would grow by 7.5% a year. Either way the program expands by more than double the rate of inflation through 2011.”

    But there is good news. By switching to GEICO, I saved a lot of money on my car insurance. Seriously, our own home state senator has been up to some good work: “Senators Sam Brownback of Kansas and John McCain of Arizona have joined with five first-term Republicans to propose some genuine cost cutting. Their plan would delay the Medicare prescription drug bill, adjust Medicare benefits to seniors with incomes of more than $80,000 a year (or $160,000 for a couple), cancel highway pork projects, end dozens of obsolete spending programs, and cut all domestic discretionary spending programs by 5%.”

    Federal and state spending continues to grow rapidly. Politicians seem unable to resist its allure. If we would realize that almost all this spending is taking money from one person and giving it to someone else to whom it does not belong, we could evaluate this spending in its proper moral context.

  • How government destroys self-reliance

    Writing from Lexington, Kentucky

    There is a problem when government interferes with what people should be doing for themselves. Government can destroy the incentive to provide for yourself and your family.

    For the families of victims of the September 11, 2001 terrorists attack on New York, a board determined how much the family should receive in compensation based on a variety of factors, including the age and earning potential of the deceased. Then, the award was reduced by the amount of any life insurance the deceased had. We should ask what is the message given when government does this? What is the incentive to forgo current spending in order to buy life insurance, when the government may take the benefit that you paid for away from you? That’s exactly what happened to the people who had their own life insurance. The government took it from them, and they were worse off for having it. Conversely, for those who did not provide their own insurance, the government provided it for them, at no cost.

    For those who suffered losses due to floods from hurricane Katrina in Mississippi, that state’s attorney general is suing insurance companies to force them to pay for flood damage, even though the usual homeowner’s policy fairly shouts that flood damage isn’t covered. If Mississippi succeeds in forcing insurance companies to pay for flood damage, what message does that send to those who sought to protect and provide for themselves by paying flood insurance premiums for years? At minimum, the government ought to refund the premiums they paid, if government is to give the same benefit to those who paid no premiums.

    These two examples illustrate how, in an effort to appear compassionate and help unfortunate victims of tragedy, government destroys the incentive to provide for one’s own self and family. When government forces the same outcome for everyone, the same result for those who sacrificed and prepared and for those who didn’t, we might ask why even bother preparing?

  • How government insurance destroyed New Orleans

    Writing from Chicago, Illinois

    In the September 3, 2005 New York Times, columnist John Tierney educates us on the difference between private insurance and government insurance. Currently, the flood insurance that’s available through the federal government, because the premiums are so low, doesn’t fully reflect the costs of assuming that risk. And even as cheap as the flood insurance rates are, not many people bought it.

    What’s wrong with government insurance that’s priced too low to cover the risks it insures? First, the taxpayers as a whole have to pay to subsidize something that benefits only a few. Second, as Mr. Tierney writes, building strong levees is a long-term project that protects against something that probably won’t happen before the next election — the time horizon of most politicians. “Members of Congress will always have higher priorities than paying for levees in someone else’s state.”

    Also, government insurance isn’t subject to the discipline of having to make a profit. Private insurance companies must earn a profit over the long haul, so they will charge rates commensurate with the risk, and they will seek ways to reduce the risk. They might decline to insure property in the riskiest areas, and they will pressure governments to build and maintain the protections that, sadly, we learned failed in New Orleans when levees broke under conditions they should have survived. Private companies have the discipline to do this. Governments don’t.

    In his column, Mr. Tierney tells us the history of fire protection in America, and how private fire insurance has worked to ensure the fire safety we have today.

    Some may say that the poor of New Orleans couldn’t afford to live where they did if they had to pay flood insurance premiums that were priced properly. That’s something that government can’t cure — except that government will try by spending untold billions. But after New Orleans is rebuilt, it is likely that before too long the same situation will exist as did before Katrina. Do we really expect anything else?

  • Book Review: Winning The Future

    Winning The Future
    Newt Gingrich
    Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2005

    This book by former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich outlines his prescription for what America needs to do to avoid decline. The five threats Gingrich identifies are Islamic terrorism, that God will be driven from American life, that America will lose its patriotic sense of self, that America will lose its economic supremacy to China and India, and that future demands of social security and Medicare will collapse our system.

    To counter these threats, Gingrich says we need a 21st century contract with America. The contract is quoted at the end of this review, as it appears on the author’s web site newt.org/winningthefuture.

    I particularly found what Gingrich has to say about American education important. He quotes the Hart-Rudman Commission on American National Security, which in 2001 concluded that the greatest threat to America was a terrorist attack. The second greatest threat is “the failure of math and science education. In fact, in an unanimously approved provision, the Commission said that the failure of math and science education is a greater threat than any conceivable conventional war in the next quarter century.”

    Further, “For the last twenty years, we have tried to improve education while accepting the fundamental principles of a failed system guarded by education bureaucrats and teachers unions.” Also: “There has been a steady growth in the amount of money spent on red tape, bureaucracy, and supervision. We now have curriculum specialists who consult curriculum consultants who work with curriculum supervisors who manage curriculum department heads who occasionally actually meet with teachers.”

    Interestingly, Gingrich proposes paying students, starting in middle school, to learn math and science. What a refreshing idea! Instead of them learning to work at McDonald’s after school for spending money, they could earn it by taking the tough courses that so many young children seek to avoid.

    This idea, and other creative and refreshing ideas make this book worthwhile to read.

    The 21st Century Contract with America

    I

    Defend America and our allies from those who would destroy us. To achieve security, we will develop the intelligence, diplomatic, information, defense, and homeland security systems and resources for success.

    II

    Transform the Social Security system into personal savings accounts that will enable every worker to have higher retirement incomes from their own work and avoid the need for financial support from their children.

    III

    Recenter America on the Creator from Whom all our liberties come. We will insist on a judiciary that understands the centrality of God in American history and reasserts the legitimacy of recognizing the Creator in public life.

    IV

    Establish patriotic education for our children and patriotic immigration for new Americans. To achieve this,we will renew our commitment to education about American citizenship based on American history and an understanding of the Founding Fathers and the core values of American civilization.We will insist that both our children
    and immigrants learn the key values and key facts of American history as the foundation of their growth as citizens.

    V

    Meet the triple economic challenges of an explosion in scientific and technological knowledge, an increasingly competitive world market, and the rise of China and India by implementing:

    A new system of civil justice to reduce the burden of lawsuits and to incentivize young people to go into professions other than the law.
    A dramatically simplified tax code that favors savings, entrepreneurship, investment, and constant modernization of equipment and technology.
    Math and science learning equal to any in the world and educating enough young Americans to both discover the science of the future and to compete successfully in national security and the economy with other well-educated societies.
    Investing in the scientific revolutions that are going to transform our world—particularly in energy, space, and the environment.
    Transforming health care into a 21st Century Intelligent Health System that improves our health while lowering costs dramatically. In the process, American health care will become our highest value export and foreign exchange earning sector.

    VI

    Work to include every American in a system of patriotic stewardship so every person has a real opportunity to pursue happiness as their Creator endowed. Prepare for the aging of the baby boomers and their children so we can have active healthy aging with the best quality of life, the longest period of independent living, and the greatest prosperity. We will:

    Develop a system in which those who wish to stay economically active are encouraged and incentivized to do so because active people live longer and healthier, have a greater opportunity to pursue happiness, and are less of a burden on their fellow citizens;
    Develop a system of independent living and assisted living that increases the years in which people can be on their own and in most cases enables people to live their entire lives with freedom and dignity;
    Develop a new model of quality long-term care in which both the care and the quality of life are compatible with a twenty-first century American expectation of progress and innovation.
    Use the new technologies and new scientific knowledge to turn disabilities into capabilities and change government regulations and programs to help every American achieve the fullest possible ability to pursue happiness.

    VII

    Change the mindset of big government in Washington by replacing bureaucratic public administration with Entrepreneurial Public Management so government can operate with the speed, effectiveness, and efficiency of the information age.

    VIII

    Balance the federal budget and insist on a lean government, low tax, low interest rate economy to maximize growth in a competitive world.

    IX

    Insist on congressional reform to make the legislative branch responsive to the needs of the 21st century.

    X

    Ensure an election process that is honest, accountable, accurate, and free from the threat of illegal votes or subsequent litigation.

    If we insist on these goals and insist on electing leaders at all levels dedicated to these goals, we will be able to leave our children and grandchildren an America of safety, health, prosperity, and freedom that would make our parents and grandparents proud.We too will have done our duty to our country and our achievements as citizens will be worthy of the America we inherited.

  • George W. Bush leads in discretionary spending

    In an article published by The Cato Institute (Bush Beats Johnson: Comparing the Presidents), we can read this:

    Revised data released during the summer by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) provide analysts the ability to make side-by-side comparisons of the spending habits of each president during the last 40 years. All presidents presided over net increases in spending overall, though some were bigger spenders than others. As it turns out, George W. Bush is one of the biggest spenders of them all. In fact, he is an even bigger spender than Lyndon B. Johnson in terms of discretionary spending.

    This is before the prescription drug plan spending has started, and before costs from the recent hurricanes were known.

    It makes me long for the days of the Clinton presidency, when a Congress led by the opposing party seemed to hold spending in check. But now that Republicans hold both Congress and the White House, it seems that spending is spiraling out of control.

  • Randy Scholfield and less government

    In an editorial in the September 18, 2005 Wichita Eagle, Randy Scholfield wrote “Less government is a laudable goal.”

    The dictionary defines laudable as “Deserving commendation; praiseworthy” or “Deserving honor, respect, or admiration.” Mr. Scholfield’s past writings don’t treat the goal of less government this way. In fact, it doesn’t seem there is a single government program that Mr. Scholfield doesn’t like and praise.

    On September 13, 2004, he advocated more funding for early childhood education, writing “… the state Legislature needs to do the right thing for the state’s children and future, and invest in early childhood education.”

    He seems to automatically believe that schools need more money.

    He believes in government subsidies. In an editorial in The Wichita Eagle published on April 19, 2005, he wrote: “Wichita should stick to its subsidies. They’re fostering competition, not stifling it, and paying off big-time for the community by lowering airfares and boosting economic development.”

    He has consistently supported the government building the downtown Wichita arena.

    He advocates more government spending on arts (August 9, 2005 “Culture requires community support”).

    He supports more funding for Exploration Place.

    Mr. Scholfield, is there any government program you have opposed, any example that would lend credibility to your claim that less government is a laudable goal?

  • The misplaced morality of public officials

    In Wichita some public officials, particularly mayor Carlos Mayans, are seeking to eliminate adult businesses and stores selling pornography. This focus on private morality lies in sharp contrast with government’s large-scale acts of public immorality.

    If government allows people to gamble, look at nude dancers, or buy pornography and sex toys, it is not government that is “sinning” or acting immorally. Government is not requiring that we do these things. Government is merely allowing those who wish to do so to engage in these activities.

    But when government — say the Wichita City Council — takes the property of one person and gives it to another person to whom it does not belong, government is actively and purposefully committing an immoral act.

    How do we know that it is immoral when government takes money from one person and gives it to someone else? We can learn from the insight of Frederic Bastiat (1801 – 1850), writing in his short book The Law:

    But how is this legal plunder [theft] to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.

    It doesn’t matter to whom the money is given: poor people, homeless people, airlines, farmers, banks, artists, downtown developers, problem gamblers, nonprofit organizations, students, schools, civic groups, museums, sick people, children, public amenities, or businesses under the guise of economic development. It doesn’t matter how much they need it, or how deserving they may be. It’s simply wrong for a private person or government to take money from one person and give it to another. The economist Walter E. Williams also makes this case succinctly:

    Can a moral case be made for taking the rightful property of one American and giving it to another to whom it does not belong? I think not. That’s why socialism is evil. It uses evil means (coercion) to achieve what are seen as good ends (helping people). We might also note that an act that is inherently evil does not become moral simply because there’s a majority consensus.

    This is not to say that we should not support some of the people or groups mentioned earlier. We should do so voluntarily, however. To help someone through an act of charity is noble. There is nothing good or moral happening when governments tax one person and give the proceeds to someone else.

    So when government officials want to control private morality, remember government’s large-scale acts of public immorality.

  • The Invasiveness of Government

    TRACKSIDE
    by John D’Aloia Jr.
    May 31, 2005

    Trackside last discussed the use of the legislative process to feed the insatiable itch for power that overtakes elected officials. This past session a majority of Kansas state senators demonstrated the itch by passing SB45, a bill that would have given local jurisdictions the means to instantly collect past due property taxes by making the delinquency a cause for a court judgement against all the landowner’s resources to settle the tax debt.

    As stated in that Trackside, the ability to condemn or control private property is another route to increasing the power of government. With the Endangered Species Act (ESA), those who covet power found a mighty sword to use against both individual landowners and society. The ESA is infamous for its use as a means not to protect critters but to give government and narrow interest groups power over how citizens use their land and how they spend their money. Examples abound – one of the latest revolves around the endangered Riverside fairy shrimp in California. The Riverside fairy shrimp is a fresh-water shrimp, one-half to one inch long, that lives in mud puddles after it rains. The City of Los Angeles is going to have to remove 1.3 acres of top soil, an estimated 468 tons, using hand trowels, to “transplant” endangered Riverside fairy shrimp eggs from the Los Angeles Municipal Airport (LAX for you frequent flyers) to a preserve being created at the closed El Toro Marine Corps Air Station, said preserve to be maintained by the city. The Federal Aviation Administration refused to allow a reserve for them at LAX because it would have meant having the area covered by water for several months a year, attracting birds that could be sucked into jet engines. The debate has been going on for six years. The cost was not stated. The fairy shrimp has locked up thousands of acres in California, taken it off-limits for development. The shrimp’s only value appears to be as an ecofascist tool for gaining control over private property and the use of tax dollars. This is not a productive use of the nation’s wealth or a rationale for making tax slaves of citizens.

    Not satisfied with the success in using endangered species to gain power, the ecofascists have drummed up another kind of “species” with which to bludgeon landowners. SAFETEA, the acronym for the massive transportation bill working its way through Congress, is, as one would infer by its title and stated purpose, a bill to maintain and enhance the nations transportation infrastructure. Unfortunately, the Senate version of SAFETEA contains provisions more deadly to our freedom than a few million dollars recklessly spent on home-town pork with some remote nexus to transportation, provisions that if enacted will ultimately be expanded to degrade and erode property rights. Would you expect to find new ways in the bill for government to separate you from your property rights and your resources so they could be placed on Gaia’s high altar? Not really, but that is exactly what is buried in the Senate’s SAFETEA, sections that enlarge the already draconian ESA by creating an Invasive Species Act. The title says it all. The full power of the federal government and every law-suit crazed environmentalist will be brought to bear against invasive species and those who harbor them.

    How is invasive defined? Not as gardeners define it – a plant that grows and expands wildly into areas not wanted. (Think kudzu vine.) No, the government definition of invasive is “not native”. While the SAFETEA invasive species provisions may “only” apply to highway projects today (thereby giving environmentalists a tool to shutdown highway construction), the readiness of The Clerks, egged on by interest groups, to expand their jurisdiction – mission creep – is a known phenomenon. Contemplate the implications of this definition. Like to fish for rainbow trout? Better enjoy it while you can. The feds have labeled it an invasive species as it is not native to North America. Own a German Shepard? Not native. Grow Bradford pears? Not native. Grow Kentucky bluegrass, tall fescue, or ryegrass? Not native. Hunt pheasants? Not native. Have goldfish in your pond? Not native. The list goes on and on, every item on it an opportunity for an environmentalist to paint a target on your property rights and your wallet.

    See you Trackside.

  • I, Pencil

    I, Pencil
    Leonard E. Read (Click here to read the article.)

    Do you think there exists a single person who knows how to make a lead pencil? In this article, Mr. Read shows us how there is no one who knows even a small fraction of what is necessary to produce even this simple, everyday item.

    How, then, does a lead pencil come to be manufactured? Through the uncoordinated actions of many people, each exchanging their own small amount of knowledge for something else they want.

    The absence of a master mind, of anyone dictating or forcibly directing these countless actions which bring me into being. No trace of such a person can be found. Instead, we find the Invisible Hand at work. This is the mystery to which I earlier referred.

    Later on we read this:

    the configuration of creative human energies–millions of tiny know-hows configurating naturally and spontaneously in response to human necessity and desire and in the absence of any human master-minding! Since only God can make a tree, I insist that only God could make me. Man can no more direct these millions of know-hows to bring me into being than he can put molecules together to create a tree.

    It is free expression of creative human energy that makes economies work at their maximum potential. Attempts by governments to interfere are bound to fail, as even the coordination of the production of a simple lead pencil is beyond the comprehension of any single person, agency, or computer program.