Chipper Farley’s Blog

A Facebook friend of mine recently posted a short commentary that was posted on Salon.com which cleverly and satirically calls out conservatives on their positions against government run healthcare.  You can read the article here.  This posting is very clever and the sense of irony it creates is certainly an effective approach to making the author’s underlying point: that a socialized healthcare system is a good thing.

The problem is that this short commentary misses a couple of key points and I want to respectfully disagree with the underlying premise that this now viral commentary makes: that we are surrounded by government effectiveness and that it works great and that we should therefore have no fear of government run healthcare.

First, let’s be clear that there is a difference between “government regulated” and “government run”.  The article points to the FCC, the FDA, the DOT and other regulatory agencies as a means for supporting the idea that a government-run healthcare system would be great.  Anyone who knows what those departments of government actually do would have to concede that the FCC does not broadcast anything, the FDA does not produce food or medicine, and the DOT does not actually pave roads.  Those agencies regulate broadcast media, regulate food and medicine, and regulate and award funding for road projects respectively.

And this is where I want to make my first point.  As it relates to healthcare, I don’t believe conservative opposition to President Obama’s ideas is rooted in the desire for a laissez faire healthcare market free of any and all regulation.  Rather, it is rooted in the fear of turning over management and maybe even delivery of our healthcare to the government, making it much more than a regulator and much more than any of those agencies currently is.

Next I want to hit on a huge error in this article, even though it isn’t necessarily healthcare related.  The writer sites the “federal reserve bank” as being part of the government and another example of the government providing an effective service. I hate to tell you this but it isn’t.  The Federal Reserve System, as it is correctly referred to, is a group of private banks that create our currency.  They create it out of nothing and loan it to us, at interest, to use.  The Federal Reserve System is a banking cartel that siphons wealth away from you and me (assuming you’re a US citizen) by charging us interest on the very money we must use by law.  I’ve written about this extensively on this blog.  If you’d like to hear more on this topic, read my posts about “How to Fix the Economy in Three Steps” or “Some Things You Should Know About Our Monetary System”.  The bottom line is that in this case, the government has actually privatized the one thing it never should: monetary policy.  So here, the author is just plain wrong.

But getting back to the actual posting…at the end of the entry, the writer mocks the conservative belief that “the government can’t do anything right”.  Can it?  Well, in some cases yes.  I would argue that in regulation the government, while often overreaching, is usually more right than wrong.  Our foods and medicines are relatively safe.  Our building codes are pretty good.  Our workplaces are not overtly hazardous…just as the article says.  Those things are true.

But again, did the government produce the food, medicine, houses, or businesses in which we work? No.  And that’s where the problem is for conservatives like me.  While the government has a place in regulation, I believe it has no place in delivery.

Why is that?  Because it simply has no incentive to do anything efficiently or effectively.  It has no competition.  And on top of that, if it runs over-budget, it just prints more money to pay for itself.  The end result is that, absent a competitor, any service or product delivered by the government will be of inferior quality to one produced by the free market.  And beyond that, if the product or service is produced over budget, the government just piles more debt on you and me to pay for whatever it is that it’s doing.  That’s the problem.  Need proof?  Consider these programs: the post office, medicare, social security, Amtrak.  Any of those operating efficiently?  Any of those running on a balanced budget?  The post office lost billions last year.  Medicare will be bankrupt in a few years.  The social security trust fund is full of IOU’s.  Amtrak has never made a penny.  I could go on.

So the issue here is not that conservatives can’t accept government doing what it is supposed to.  It’s that we can’t accept it doing things it shouldn’t.  And to a large degree, managing delivery of goods and services is not something the government should do because it has no incentive to do it well.

Now, healthcare is indeed broken.  Reform is clearly needed.  I want to be loud an clear on that.  The current system we have is a complete mess.  We pay TONS more than other countries for our care and don’t get care that is significantly better.  “Well that makes the case that the government should run healthcare,” you may say as you reason that many of the countries we compare ourselves to have socialized healthcare.  I would argue that, while there is some truth in that, our system could be even better than anything out there.  I believe that a truly market based system with minimal government intervention would work better than anything currently in existence.  If we removed government from the equation and allowed a truly free market for healthcare to thrive, with appropriate regulation of course, I am convinced that costs would come down and choice would increase.  This has been proven time and time again and is a basic tenet of capitalism.

“But”,  you may say, “what about people with health problems that wouldn’t be attractive to insurance companies or hospitals because there is no way to make money off of them?”  Well that is a real issue.  My thought on that one is this…maybe there is a role for government here, but not in creating something.  Rather, the government could incentivize the private creation of philanthropic medical outlets that would care for those that “fell through the cracks” and couldn’t get health insurance or afford care.  Think that couldn’t work?  Then explain St. Jude.  Explain the Shriners Hospitals.  Explain the Ronald McDonald House.  I have personal experience with each of these and know that they provide outstanding care and services while operating on charitable contributions.

But there is a bigger issue here, one that extends beyond any single issue and that is the role of government in our lives.  I contend that the more power that we give the government, the more it will take away from us.  This country was created to be free, to be a place where individuals thrive on their own ingenuity and hard work.    Thomas Jefferson wrote:

Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.

I agree with him.  So why would we willingly hand over our healthcare and a huge slice of our economy to those in power?

So there you have it…my take on the “I am an American Conservative”.  If you’ve read this far, thanks for taking the time.  Again, I want to stress that I will never use this blog to berate or belittle those who do not agree with me and I would encourage my fellow conservatives out there to take that position as well.  I hope to persuade, not alienate.  So if you are persuaded, leave a comment and let me know.  If not, tell me why.  I’d love to hear from you.

Thanks.

Chipper