LEE’S SUMMIT, FEBRUARY 12, 2016 – This is the second in a four-part series that revisits an article I wrote in 2008, the first week of this blog. I put down my thoughts on how I was going to select the candidate I wanted to be President of the United States (click here). Eight Years later it is time to revisit the second of the four criteria.
What is their fundamental belief in Government?
What is their social view of Government?
What is their fiscal view of Government?
How will they react to a crisis and how will they leave the presidency at the end of their term?
WHAT IS THE CANDIDATE’S SOCIAL VIEW OF GOVERNMENT?
How far should the government, in the view of the president, be involved in social issues? As you look for a president, think about how much do you want government intervening in the lives of each citizen. The one comment that comes to mind is an old speech by Hillary Clinton where she made the point that “…it takes a village to raise a child…”. Can you honestly think that you want the government telling you exactly how to raise your children? How about the colleges they can go to? Or, how about what type of a career should the follow?
That concept, of government intrusion, may be a little far-fetched in your mind, but it is truly not that crazy. Let me paint a possible set of circumstances. Let’s take it for granted that government needs to provide college education for all (and let’s not get into the mess our public school system is in right now). If the government is going to pay for college, is it not reasonable to think that there would be pressure from the tax payers to not waste the money on people who start on a given career track and then don’t finish, or are not very good at it. From there, it is not hard to build the argument that if people are going to accept Government support for college then they have to take placement tests, and career selection tests. Now it is not hard to go to the next step and see that the government – in paying for the education of all – will then determine what you can and cannot study.
Social intervention by government is not just limited to college, that was just a simple example; the true test is health care as it is now (Obamacare). Eight years ago, I wrote in disbelief that anyone would actually move to socialized medicine and the single payer. Now we have a discussion on one side to repeal it because it is not working. On the other side, there is an argument that it did not go far enough.
Both sides agree that Obamacare is not acceptable. The solutions differ.
At the core is the argument is the Social View of the candidate. Should Government reach into our wallets further, should they tell us what Doctors to see or not see, what colleges to attend, what education we can seek, and – as in China – what cities we can and cannot live in?
Understand the candidate’s social view, and you’ll understand one more piece of what motivates them.
Hope to read your thoughts on the matter; leave a comment.
The Lee’s Summit Conservative