What Government Should Do

“The government should do something.”

With any endeavor, any crisis (real or imagined) or any movement, that cry rises from nearly all quarters. Be it a serious event like a flood, or an imagined looming catastrophe like global warming, the immediate reaction in front of and behind the cameras is, “the government should fix it.”

Government can do no such thing. For one simple reason: With government comes politics and politics are nefarious.

Government and politics are inseparable. Anything that involves the government — be it through funding or regulation — involves politicians and therefore, politics. It is impossible for that not to be the case. The belief that a politician — any politician — can somehow be apolitical is naïve in the extreme. All of them owe their office to someone else — a coalition, like-minded donors, PACs, cause groups, industry sectors, unions, George Soros and, to a limited extent, voters.

Because of this, introducing government changes the mission of the cause, movement or crisis response. The goal (a cure, the end of hunger, clean air, safe streets) is no longer the sole objective. Politicians add new objectives — appeasing a constituency, getting re-elected, advancing a larger agenda, sticking it to an adversary, getting positive PR, diverting attention, etc. Aid, science, logic, freedom, truth, effectiveness… all become secondary (at best) to political aims.

The historical evidence is clear: Usually, government involvement, far from helping, makes the situation worse. After massive spending to pull America out of the Great Depression, unemployment was nearly twice as high in 1937 as it was a year following the crash. After massive government funding, involvement and action, our inner cities are worse off than before. After strong-arming lenders to relax mortgage requirements, the collapse is costing trillions. The cost of education and health care have spiraled since the fed first began to “help.”

In spite of its track record, there are those who will scream, beg and insist that government “do something” because only government has the money, power and resources to help. But consider:

In 1889, the first Johnstown Flood laid waste to the city. As word spread, relief committees were organized across the country. Buffalo Bill Cody held a benefit for the flood fund in Paris. Over 1,400 full carloads of goods — 17 million pounds worth — rolled into the city on rails rebuilt by the PRR. And over $3.7 million in donations came in from the U.S. and around the world. FEMA didn’t exist for the simple reason that it didn’t need to. We can take care of ourselves.

In 1936, Johnstown flooded a second time. This time, the government “did something.” The fed built channels to make Johnstown “flood proof.” And the State of Pennsylvania enacted a temporary 10% liquor tax to raise the $41 million needed to rebuild the community.

Forty-one years later, “flood proof” Johnstown flooded yet again.

Seventy-three years later, that temporary 10% liquor tax, which met its intended financial goal by 1942, is now 18%.

After the 1889 flood, good hearted people saw a need. They reacted to the plight of their fellow man with one goal: to help. In 1936, politicians saw an opportunity. The fed’s primary goal was to create jobs (and save their own) during the depression. The state’s, to create a new — and permanent — revenue stream.

History again and again tells us that the government should, indeed, do something. Specifically, stay away.