If angels were to govern men

In his column on libertarianism, John Bice’s lazy analysis causes him to get very little right. First, Bice claims libertarians “see virtually no role for government.” In this claim, he mistakes us for anarchists. Libertarians believe government has an essential but specifically limited role in society – protect the fundamental rights of individuals, namely life, liberty, and property.

Libertarians believe these rights take precedence because these are the only rights that exist. A group does not have any rights beyond those of each individual within that group. Granting additional rights to a group of individuals because of their size or power is nothing short of tyranny.

Libertarians believe in the power of free markets - the only economic system compatible with individual rights. As the name implies, free markets allow individuals to freely enter contracts and make choices. Is it “an almost religious belief?” No, religion is based on faith in the unseen. The benefits of free markets have been seen and proven over hundreds of years.

Bice’s statement that “[l]iberalism acknowledges such rights, and the benefit of a free market, but balances these interests with the public good and economic fairness” begs the question “Who gets to decide what the ‘public good’ and ‘economic fairness’ are?” As James Madison, Father of the Constitution, revealed, “If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.” Contrary to this wisdom, Bice apparently believes liberalism can produce angels capable of defining ‘public good’ and ‘economic fairness’.

These are just a few of Bice’s inaccurate observations. He loses any remaining credibility when he claims libertarians ignore “our most successful government programs.” One wonders how he defines success.

Social Security creates a large class of government-dependent retirees and pays out far below the historical averages of private investments while it speeds towards insolvency.

Medicare and Medicaid suppress competition in the health care industry contributing to yearly cost escalations greatly exceeding the rate of inflation. Additionally, these programs are beating Social Security in the race to insolvency. In 2004, Medicare’s trustees calculated that we would need to deposit $61.6 trillion in an interest-bearing account to cover all of Medicare's future deficits.

Finally anyone labeling public (as in government-run) education successful, ignores the high costs and low results in our current system. Just like health care, the government’s overbearing involvement results in excessive cost escalations while delivering poor results. A competitive education market would serve our needs far better than the one-size-fits-all bureaucracy that exists today.

There is nothing radical about knowing the free market efficiently and effectively stocks our grocers’ shelves, builds our houses, and clothes our bodies. What’s radical is believing the government can successfully fund our retirements, keep us healthy, and educate our children.

[Letter to the Editor - The State News. Submitted 01/24/2006]