Role of Government Is to Expand Our Exercise our Rights, not Limit that Ability

So Health Care Reform passed. Unfortunate but I fault the Republican leadership. No solid argument has ever been made against this, or, frankly, any other program. The usual "it costs too much" simply doesn't carry weight, as many good programs cost a lot, and sometimes it is good to accept some debt for good programs.

The interstate highway system was a program that was good, cost a lot and was opposed by many due to cost. It's budgeted cost was $25 billion over 12 years; it ended up costing $114 billion (adjusted for inflation, $425 billion in 2006 dollars.

This legislation, the National Interstate and Defense Highways Act of 1956, had failed several times. It was co-authored by Sen. Albert Gore (D-TN), father of VP Al Gore, and levied fees and raised taxes (Huey Long was the only Senator to oppose the gasoline tax). And this was the source of the infamous Byrd amendment, named for Rep. Harry Flood Byrd (D-VA).

Now, the discussion must be, why was this the right thing to do, if it was (there are a lot of negatives, urban sprawl for one), and why was this a proper function of the federal government. Republicans have not engaged in this discussion on health care, making it largely a discussion over cost and “government control” and government ineptitude. Until they engage the people in this discussion of purpose of the government, Republicans will lose the large issues involving the role of government providing benefits to citizens. As of today, a large group of our citizens believe that it is the function of the government to provide them benefits.

As government does more for the individual, the individual becomes less important. As the government creates and runs programs for the “common good”, the ability of the individual to exercise their rights succumbs.

One of the clearest minds I know has written a great piece on the role of government relative to the individual. Dennis Prager (“you have a moral obligation to be happy”), has written a succinct column on how the government minimizes individuals.

Link

“The more the state does, the less its citizens are needed to do. One well-known example is the way welfare robbed so many men of significance when women and their children came to depend financially on the state.”