Nancy Salvato,
January 4, 2005
The intention of the framers of the U.S. Constitution was to create a strong federal government, limited in authority by specific enumerated powers divided among three separate branches of government; providing a built in system of checks and balances. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that the people authorized the government to tax and spend their hard earned dollars on whatever the government deems is best for the country. No, their authority was to be concerned with things such as; treaties with foreign governments, providing for the defense for our citizens, protecting the citizens’ rights to life, liberty, and property...and other stuff like that.
So, it continually amazes me when the citizenry of this country act on the belief that the government should collect roughly 1/3 of our paychecks to spend on that which often doesn't concern the laborer from which the taxed income is dependent or which could be better taken care of by the citizenry themselves. There were two glaring examples of this in the news today, one of which is the emergency aid being allocated to the victims of the Tsunami and one has to do with the insolvency of the United airlines pension fund.
To think that the President of the United States was called stingy because of the amount of money he initially pledged to the Tsunami victims on behalf of our country is unconscionable. He showed great fiscal restraint by giving a figure of 15 million dollars, knowing full well that money would be forthcoming through the thousands of private contributions from individuals and businesses across the United States. and what better way is there to get something accomplished quickly and efficiently but through private capitalistic enterprise? Thousands of people have already donated millions of dollars and goods to the cause.
One person, John Hewitt, caught my attention because he plans to give at least $250,000 in aid to the victims. His plan is to donate by giving a non specified amount to the Stop Hunger Now charity for every tax return his Liberty Tax Service firm completes. The CEC of Pew Charitable Trusts believes that if the private sector of every major city could donate $50-$70 million, it would help prevent starvation, disease and homelessness for the survivors of this unforeseen disaster.
This isn't surprising though. The Washington Times recently reported that our government was ranked 22nd in foreign aid but that private philanthropy is thriving. "american private charities are set to spend more than $200 billion this year, and more than half of U.S. adults will work on volunteer projects, putting in an estimated 20 billion hours in donated time. One study by the Washington-based Philanthropy Roundtable found that the average american household contributes seven times as much to charity as its German counterpart, and americans are six times more likely than Germans to do volunteer work."
This serves to prove the point that it's best to use the government as a last resort to effect change, something that the framers of our constitution understood only too well. It's always best to use the resources of private citizenry first. The concept of limited government is not only more efficient, it is much more respectful of the rights of each citizen. Wouldn't you rather choose the beneficiaries of any money that you decide you can afford to contribute to charity?
The other news item which left me reeling from disbelief was about how the U.S. pension insurance agency plans to assume responsibility for an under funded pension plan for pilots at bankrupt United airlines. The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. wants to take on $1.4 billion in pension payments; meaning "taxpayers will be picking up roughly half the cost of the pilots' plan." The Pension Benefit Guarantee Corp. already has a deficit of $23 billion. airline claims account for 20 percent of their total claims.
Now am I to understand that my hard earned money not only goes to Social Security which I will unlikely ever see, but is also used to bail out pension plans for employees in industries who are not even required to contribute to private retirement plans through their company, but choose to do so knowing full well it's their responsibility, not that of the government?
The last I heard, we lived in a free country and our government was supposed to protect our property rights. When did our Constitution become socialist? I don't remember voting on that, do you?
Nancy Salvato is the President of The Basics Project, (www.Basicsproject.org) a non-profit, non-partisan research and educational project whose mission is to promote the education of the american public on the basic elements of relevant political, legal and social issues important to our country. She is an experienced educator and an independent contractor with Prism Educational Consulting. She serves as Educational Liaison for Illinois Senator Carole Pankau. She works nationally and locally furthering the cause of Education Reform. Her writing is widely published on the internet and occasionally in print venues such as the Washington Times. Her opinions have been heard on select radio programs across the nation. additionally, her writing has been recognized by the US Secretary of Education.
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2018 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2018 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement