LeftNavBar_Background_Color_Bar Go to Home Page of Your Historical News Source Your Are Here: Home > Weekly News Columns > Government: Promoting, not Providing, the General Welfare See where Bill stands on the issues Take a look at Video Clips of Bill talking about the issues National Security Issues Coverage of Foreign Policy Issues Coverage of Foreign Policy Issues Coverage of Foreign Policy Issues Coverage of Foreign Policy Issues Coverage of Foreign Policy Issues Coverage of Foreign Policy Issues Coverage of Foreign Policy Issues Visit Bill's Facebook Page Tweet Bill from his Twitter Page You may use anything on this site provided attribution is included You may use anything on this site provided attribution is included Contact Sarge TableContentse

Last Week:
Continuing Resolutions
Continue ineffective Government

Header Graphic of Bill Sargent, Mark Mansius, and John Gay, the Three Musketeers

Next Week:
Legislative Leadership

Government: Promoting, not Providing,
the General Welfare

May 1, 2017

It is clear that our founding fathers saw the role of government as “promoting” the general welfare not “providing” it.  As we've witnessed for decades; liberal policies move us toward a welfare state, and a generational cycle of poverty is created.  Families become locked into subsistence poverty as a career choice. We believe that in a free society, government’s responsibility is to promote peace among its citizens with the least interference in the citizen's individual lives as possible. Government's primary role is to provide for the common defense, protect the rights of individuals and to promote justice.

A lady living in our congressional district shared the following story with us.  Her home was left to her and another relative; so she was a “co-owner” of the property where she was living.    The places where she worked didn’t provide adequate healthcare insurance and she needed to work two or three jobs in order to make ends meet.

When suddenly faced with major medical bills this taxpayer was told the state couldn’t help her until she had exhausted all of her personal assets. Government help would only become available if and when she sold her home.  The problem was that she was a co-owner and the other owner was not interested in liquidating the property.  The other problem is where would she live and how would she ever get back on her feet if she were homeless. Her request for government assistance was rejected and so for years she struggled to find a solution to her financial troubles related to her medical expenses. 

Although her circumstances may seem unique, each of us faces our own challenges.  Good government’s primary goal should be to ensure equal opportunities to its citizens (along with an equal possibility of failure). Government should never pick "winners" and "losers". 

Local organizations are better suited to address the individual needs of citizens in their own communities. Local charities and organizations can direct local resources and services, in a customized approach, as opposed to the typical one size fits all big government approach.  Local organizations can quickly make decisions based on the resources available and provide assistance in a much more timely manner. 

Our society, unfortunately, appears to be moving toward the belief that government is the solution while the truth is government is the problem.  The cliché “Hi, I’m with the federal government and I’m here to help you!” is fraught with dangers.  The federal government taxes its citizens and then offers to send a portion of the excess back to states and communities through bloated bureaucracies.  The further wealth travels from the persons who struggled to produce it; the more of it is lost to waste and graft.   The closer individuals in need are to those generous individuals and groups working to meet those needs, the more likely the needs can be met without turning the person seeking help into a dependent of the state. 

Mark, Bill, and John

E 2