Hurricanes & Lessons Learned?

The aftermath of any natural disaster, in this specific case Hurricane Irene, should never be heralded in any positive manner, save the individual heroics of safety and survival, but in this instance this most recent natural disaster can be used as a springboard, a starting point for a necessary discussion on the role of government as perceived and debated between the major political factions within our national government.

The political extremes are pedaling the myths that one side wants the abolition of government; that the other will stop at nothing short of a cradle to grave nanny state with government controlling every minutiae of daily life. This is the current state of the body politic. The American people should be better served and should demand better, accept no less.

It is obvious that both positions are ridiculous and should not be taken seriously, but the issue remains of determining what the role and nature of a centralized federal government should be.

In an instance of natural disaster such as Hurricane Irene there are no other entities that are equipped to handle the relief efforts necessary for the help and protection of people and property. The logistical coordination necessary is grand in scope but methodical in its implementation.  This is an instance where government is both necessary and essential. A well funded and resourced government is the only intelligent manner to cope with these issues. The government should not however be the device wherein people are made whole; personal responsibility, i.e. homeowner insurance, basic safeguards to self and property, is a basic tenet of a free people; acts of God however, can never be planned for in scope. Resulting public interest eventualities though can be properly addressed by government. The fact that this simple formula escapes both of the political extremes is simultaneously sad and comedic.

A corollary to this discussion is that it also shows the idiocy of a balanced budget amendment.

To wit:

Presume that the budget allocation for addressing national disasters is one dollar per year. This year alone, before Hurricane Irene cut her swath of destruction, the excessive snows, subsequent flooding from the thaw, and the earthquake in Virginia that ran the line of the east coast, required that  the federal government spent $1.10. A balanced budget amendment would mandate that something be cut in order to pay for this relief effort. Should we cut back on education, airline safety – once the budget was passed, there would be budgetary necessities to be in balance.

This is not a case for unbridled spending, but rather accepting the fact that Americans have historically been the first with their wallets out to help their fellow citizens in time of hardship. There should be no restraints in place to limit the response to tragedy; it simply is not the American way.

The upcoming elections will determine the direction and scope of our centralized federal government. The American electorate has a simple choice: to choose an effective government that can competently step in to address emergencies brought on by acts of God, or a government that will attempt to provide a claimed panacea, which  in truth is actually more placebo,  for all of life’s hardships.

Both choices come with a cost. One choice is a matter of dollars; the other is the cost of an individuals unimpeded freedom.