I have often been accused, as an elected Budget Committee member, of having an agenda. Well, I’ve been pretty open about actually having one – and this chart almost perfectly sums it up. This image pretty much says why I do what I do and how I approach the Proper Role of Government:
(H/T: Big Journalism)
And this does not reflect my view of the Proper Role of Government – it actually shows the antithesis of it. It shows, in spending terms, how the Progressive view of government (Democrats have been responsible for much of this but certainly Republicans own a share of this as well).
My agenda:
Why should the rise of Government spending outstrip that of the normal working family (which is pretty much in line with the rate of inflation)?
And when I have challenged people on their condescending answer of "times have changed" to my question of "who screwed it up – WHY does government have to be bigger?", pretty much, no one can give me a great answer other than a wafty, gauzy type bromide along the lines of:
- people are hurting
- the needs are growing
- we can’t do it ourselves
Frankly, I think the translated answer is more like:
- somebody else can now pay for what I want
- compassion is not what I do but what I can get others to do so I feel good about having ‘done something’.
- like all living things – bureaucracies always want to grow. Unlike other living things, they only need other peoples money to do so.
- I’m lazy – somebody else will do it.
We’ve heard a lot this cycle from Republicans talking about "self-reliance" and from Democrats. The latter, well, they want Government to pretty much take care of all the needs and all of people. They’ve outsourced their responsibility to be self-responsible to that Governmental level. They have become accustomed to the false idea that only government can solve the problem, be it middling or large. They do not trust individuals to do the right thing, and even if they do, do not believe that individuals can successfully solve the problems at hand.
In essence, they do not believe in individuals – only the group.
Republicans, if they are to keep this wave going, have one singular task to accomplish. If indeed they believe that government is too big and too intrusive, they have to start talking about "self-responsibility" more. No, not just say it over and over – they must define it. They must demonstrate what they actually means in real life vs mere political rhetoric used to win elections.
It means educating folks that while we must become less dependent upon government, we must be self-responsible and move back into that field that government has so crowded out (along with all of the NGOs that have been sucking at the government teat for so long) – that field called charity.
Else, by a collective level of inaction, we will have proved the Progressives right in this. The problem is getting the populace to understand that the cavalry bearing the governmental flag is broke – not only are they not "coming over the hill to save the day", but government is too broke to man the garrison either.
You know, Zandra Rice-Hawkins believes that she was just to milking the Political Theater Gotcha game in the post that Steve outlined. Frankly, that’s not even a new stunt – Conservative college kids have been doing that for years showing the unfairness of affirmative action (and John Stossel did it for a TV show as well).
Problem is, to her, fairness means "Government do it" and if it is not, or not involved, it is unfairness.
For a land such as ours, isn’t that a poor commentary upon the Progressive mindset?
