When Abraham Lincoln scratched the words of the Gettysburg Address on the back of an envelope -- government of the people, by the people, for the people -- I am not sure that last weekend is what he had in mind. From the outside looking in it appears that we got government of the people, by an elite group who consider their own notions of what people want or need to trump what the governed are actually expressing, for some kind of misplaced notions of legacy.
Does government have a role in the lives of the governed? Absolutely! And the role is spelled out in the enumerated powers of the Constitution. Do those enumerated powers include the power to mandate health insurance coverage? Only in some twisted sense of pseudo-Constitutional over-reaching. (In my mind the same could be said for the requirement for universal education to a certain age. Is it beneficial? Absolutely! Is it the government's proper role to mandate? Absolutely not!)
What, if anything, do we do now? In the face of feeling powerless to control events that seem to be spinning out of control, can we do something other than sit back and complain? Of course we can. Will it make a difference? I really don't know--but what difference does that make? The honor is in standing for what we believe is right and just, not necessarily in winning.
My greatest fear in all of this is that pundits and politicians on both sides of the aisle will use this latest government over-reaching as a club to smack each other with in the coming months. Republicans will seek to bash Democrats with the cudgel of overly big government; and Democrats will seek to beat Republicans with the shillelagh of lack of compassion. Anyone who knows me is aware that I am no Pollyanna, but has our country devolved so far that all we can see is the chasm between the partisan positions? Is there no one who will strive to govern for the people instead of just against each other?
I am reminded of the older gentleman at a church board meeting who interjected into a serious gripe session, "Any jackass can kick down a barn, what are you going to do to make things right?" What am I going to do? Control what I can control and do what I can to influence the rest.
What does that mean? I will take a more active role in managing my own health care so that I am reducing the unnecessary costs on my behalf. That will show that government intervention is not needed to reduce health care costs. I will do what I can to help those who are in need of medical care, but are otherwise unable to get needed care. That will show that government is not necessary as a "safety net" and that regular people who care for one another can really make a difference. If it works, then I will tell the story. If not, then I will shut my yap.
Pressing on,
-Ken
The Persistent Journey -- toward authentic living in an inauthentic world
1 comment:
One drawback in our form of government is that the folks in the home districts of those who are contradicting the popular will are likely to return them to office because of the pork brought to those districts. On the other hand, there are disadvantages to a nationwide popularity contest. What is depressing is that I don't see a peaceful, civil solution. Though there is some controversy about the source, the following comment seems believable: “A democracy is always temporary in nature: it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority will always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship.”
Post a Comment