Should the Government Pick Winners and Losers?

Prominent national Republican leaders are standing together on the principle of a free market unimpeded by government coercion .

In March of last year a group of  US Senators and House members expressed the following  united sentiment:

“The government should not be in the business of picking winners and losers”

According to Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), and Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.), House Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.) all advocated the rational position that government picking economic winners and losers was unsound policy.  That was slightly over one year ago.  Today Rob Maness of Louisiana is seeking to win the US Senate seat held by the disappointing Senator Landrieu, who fosters the idea that the government knows best.  All across the nation true free market candidates are similarly embracing the idea that The government should not be in the business of picking winners and losers.

That concept that The government should not be in the business of picking winners and losers reiterates the theory of early American philosopher Henry David Thoreau.  He is accredited with saying “That government is best which governs least”.    What is too frequently forgotten, or overlooked by these brilliant men of the past is their full sentiment.  Said Thoreau in its entirety “I heartily accept the motto,—“That government is best which governs least;” and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which I also believe,—“That government is best which governs not at all;”

While there are many Republicans, like Mike Lee, whom embrace the full sentiment of Thoreau for less government there are others that find it to be a mild convenience to their whim.  When the sacrament of self-aggrandizement is proffered they readily fall to their knees in worship.

State Senator Steve Urquhart, a former opponent to Senator Mike Lee’s nomination, is one who has proven his disdain for the idea that The government should not be in the business of picking winners and losers.  He openly and with no small level of braggadocio championed the effort for the Utah State Government should pick winners and losers, when he violated at least the spirit of fair-mindedness, by exercising undue influence over the Utah Department of Health.

On the one hand the senator neatly bundles his message of conservatism into a headline.  Yet, behind the scenes he is willing to use his loaned influence to foster his self-obsessed agenda.

Sadly, it appears he has the force and power of the government of the “second most conservative state in the union” backing him.  What is says of the state government is that it in fact has a strong intent to pick economic winners and losers.  Whereas, the Utah Department of Health had an opportunity to justly weigh the evidence for authorizing an ambulance service for St. George they chose influence over reason.  When asked to provide some justification for supporting the influence peddling they immediately dove for the foxhole by calling in the ethically embattled Attorney General’s office to run interference.

On a daily basis we see a federal executive branch not simply violating the Constitution, but also violating decency.  We have a US Senator willing to fight that disgraceful conduct.  Yet, here at home we seem to have government powers at play that believe “If the feds can get away with it…so can I”.

As I have suggested previously I will repeat.  This issue needs as much scrutiny as does the presidential administration.  Anything less than a full and complete independent investigation is a dereliction of duty.  Not to mention that it also says The government must be in the business of picking winners and losers.

Yes, there are self-serving state senators that will tout their long-winded rhetoric of wanting what is best for the community.  That is to be expected.  That is how dictators always begin their rise to power; flattering the people into believing they have the public’s best interests at heart.  There is one way to find out for sure, when the evidence exists otherwise, independent investigation.



One thought on “Should the Government Pick Winners and Losers?

  1. The business of picking winners and losers is crony capitalism, confirmation biased towards friends and independence biased towards the enemy. What is needed, indeed, is independent confirmation by citizens – one independent vote or voice each.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s