Folks:
I’d like to raise the question, “What’s
fair?” Obviously, I’m asking the
question in light of public policy, American government,
and public service– I really don’t care if it was “fair” for
Tampa Bay to run up the score
against Oakland.
The question “What’s fair?” and its close
companion, “What’s perceived to
be fair?” are essential questions for a democracy,
because a democracy exists
by the consent of the governed. “What’s fair?” is
not a necessary question
in Saudi Arabia or North Korea or Cuba. It’s not only
unnecessary, it’s out
of the box for all but a few incredibly brave citizens.
“What’s fair?” devolves into questions – and
debates – about who benefits
from, and who pays to maintain American society as it is.
And assuming that
there is some agreement that we can improve America, where
should we take our
country and who should pay to take us there. Obviously, “paying” doesn’t
mean just with money.
But money is important. We can measure our national priorities
with money– especially the money
that passes through federal, state, and local
governments. And the money streams that are affected by laws,
tax exemptions,
loan guarantees, the lot.
My vote is for an America that is “more fair,” and
offers “more
opportunity,” consistent with long-term economic success
and stability. For
me, “long-term” is measured in decades and centuries.
Not that having a
simple goal means that the debate is over, or that the road
ahead is clear.
E. J. Dionne, Jr., wrote a column entitled “Who
Will Pay?” for the Post that
addresses some of these issues. I’ll bring others to
the table occasionally.
The key quote from Dionne’s article is:
"The man of great wealth owes a particular obligation
to the State because he
derives special advantages from the mere existence of government," the
Republican Roosevelt declared in 1906. "It is only under
the shelter of the
civil magistrate that the owner of valuable property can
sleep a single night
in security."
Bob
Knisely
PS: The report includes tax expenditures,
but does not include federal credit
enhancements, such as loan guarantees. It’s a mind-boggling
task to figure
out the government’s exposure to loss from potential
defaulted loans, and
even more difficult to tell what individuals, corporations,
and governments
would have done in the absence of the loan guarantees. But
I’ll bet a
Krispy-Kreme or two that the families earning less than $50,000
don’t reap
many of the benefits of credit enhancements. Any takers?
WebLink Citations:
1) Who
Will Pay? By E. J. Dionne Jr. Washington Post Friday, January 17, 2003;
Page A23
| 
