Big Government Conservatism

Town Hall ^ | July 31, 2003 | Doug Bandow

[My2Cents]

If Bush and the GOP promote conservative values and policies more often than not, I'm satisfied. I think they do. Does that mean I'm 100% pleased with what Congress and the Administration are proposing in domestic policy? No. But I'm not a perfectionist. If conservativism is a straight line, and Bush and the GOP are at 25- or 35-degrees of separation, I can live with that, because the only other viable alternative is no alternative at all.

Someone wisely said on one of these futile threads that it's better to light one candle than to curse the darkness. If you're happy cursing the darkness, who am I to argue with you?

[My2Cents]

Let's talk about the prescription drug bill. What, specifically, do you oppose? The money? That's a no-brainer. From what I understand of it, it embeds the Medicare prescription drug benefit into market-based health plans. One could argue that this is the first step in creating greater privatization of Medicare. Did you know that the Medicare reforms of 1997, passed by a Republican Congress, contained a managed care option to the usual HHS-administered fee-for-service program? This was designed to both reduce the cost of Medicare, and to give seniors greater choice. Clinton and the Democrats tried to strangle the managed-care side of Medicare because it also contained the seeds of breaking the program's reliance upon HHS' central administration of the program. An inherent part of the the managed care side of Medicare was a prescription drug benefit. So, if you're arguing against prescription drugs as part of Medicare, you're about six years too late.

[spacewarp]

I would recommend that you take a look at a new political party that has formed, the American Patriot Party. I have joined, after firmly refusing to join a political party for the last 15 years. They are right where I want to be. As a matter of fact, once they get to a point where they have a state party, I may even try to run for office here in North Carolina under their banner. I'll stump from Murphy to Manteo if that's what it takes.

Paul

[goldstategop]

I support big government to protect this country from its external enemies but I think a good case can be made we're spending more on our domestic side than the country needs. Of course a lot of this spending has more to do with election-year politics than with conservative principle.

[TBP]

I think you're right.

[TBP]

Yes, I object to the money being spent, but I more fervently oppose the principle that the government should tax you and me to pay for health care for fat, drunk Kennedys.

This is simply a large step towards the complete socialization of medicine. It is the largest entitlement program in almost 40 years.

[Capitalism2003]

Bush is leading us down the bath to back door socialism.

[TBP]

I support big government to protect this country from its external enemies

I would say I support strong government for that, but still a efficient as possible. Government must be strong in performing its necessary functions, but it cannot do so when it stretches itself thin by taking on so many other functions. I view government liek a vicious dog. As long as it's on a leash and in its own yard, it's good protection. But when it breaks the leash and starts running around the neighborhood, it's a threat to everyone, including its owners.

[TBP]

Just remember that - no matter what this article says - all the increases are due to defense spending

No, there has been an 8.2 percent per year increase in discretionary domestic spending. (That is nondefense, nonentitlement.)