On last Wednesday night's MSNBC Republican debate, a “get the government out of my hair” sentiment seemed to be one of the major themes of the evening. Should the government force people to give their children life saving vaccines? No! Should the government force industries to adhere to safety standards? No! Should we have a government at all? Well, if the candidates themselves weren't all running to be the head of an entire branch of government, I would almost believe that their answer to that would be no as well.
Most Americans, even us “evil” progressives and moderates, really do know that government is not the answer to all, or even many of this country's problems. In fact, government can be, and often is a cause of our problems; however, the way in which government has been demonized by the political pundits as of late, is nothing more than a cynical play on the American people's emotions. When the American people hear about General Electric not paying taxes last year, or read about the obscene amounts of money which will be funneled through the political campaigns over the next 14 months, they are reviled by such facts and really do wish government could be put on a leash. Yes government can be bad, we get it – but it can also good, as the President pointed out on in is speech to Congress, and the Nation, on Thursday night.
The GI Bill, Medicare, Social Security, and job safety regulations are also a part of government. I would also throw in a few others examples, like public libraries and schools, police departments, financial aid and feeding and clothing people flooded out of their homes are all ways in which government succeeds and contributes to our society. Why not also throw in the moon landings while we're at it since that too was the “evil” government at work.
Of course even the most anti-government politicians don't really dislike “all” government. They only dislike the parts which are politically expedient for them to dislike at the moment. For example, Governor Perry doesn't like government run Social Security, but apparently has no problem with the government enforcing life saving vaccinations. Senator Bachmann doesn't like government when it tells energy companies and “big oil” to not do things like pollute the environment, or poison our water supplies, but she really seems to like the military – which of course is also a wing of the government.
Ron Paul is really the only Republican who is truly consistent. In fact he is so consistent as to unwittingly illustrate what the the country might look like if we took the anti-government approach to it's extreme conclusion. Safety standards for the auto industry? Who needs that! The American people are smart enough to not buy a dangerous vehicle. Of course without government enforced safety standards, all cars would be equally dangerous, seeing as how they wouldn't even have seat belts.
The President's speech, was a direct attack on this extreme anti-government ideology. It will undoubtedly draw much anger and opposition by the Republicans, Tea Party members, and radio and TV pundits. He called the anti-government crowd's bluff. Now we'll have to wait and see if they really think it politically beneficial to continue to argue that we should have a government which cannot tell a huge corporation not to dump toxic waste in our back yards and rivers, cannot pass safety laws in the work place, or one which cannot send returning veterans to college.
Do most Americans really want a government which can do nothing – bad or good? Or do they simply want government to be restrained? Ultimately it will be up to the American people to decide; however, the political battle lines have been drawn, and for the first time in his Presidency, Barack Obama seems to have finally realized that for him to have any chance of accomplishing anything of consequence, he has to be the one who actually draws the proverbial line in the sand, rather than continue to allow his opposition to do so. Will it make any difference to Americans? Only time will tell.
No comments:
Post a Comment