Last Wednesday's Wall Street Journal published a staff editorial detailing one of the negative consequences of allowing government to direct economic choices in the private sector.
The case in point is Harry Reid's new financial donors from the "renewable energy" sector.
As the editorial notes,
"The companies that belong to the American Wind Energy Association or the Solar Energy Industries Association (among the fundraiser's hosts) produce costly products that can't compete against traditional fuels. Their business plans are written around Washington subsidies and mandates. They're obviously worried a Republican majority might pare back the grants, loans and tax credits, in the name of cutting government waste."
This is what happens when government gets into the business of funding specific technologies or sectors with subsidies, rather than contracting for competitive bids without subsidies.
The editorial also notes,
"Mr. Reid has been a strong advocate of this transfer, and the industry is showing it knows how to give back."
Essentially, allowing government at any level, including states, to use government, i.e., taxpayers' money, to directly fund private enterprises, invites reciprocal bribery in the form of campaign donations to help the benevolent elected officials remain in office, the better to keep the gravy flowing back to the private companies.
It's corruption, pure and simple. And sort of embezzlement, in that public money is appropriated by an elected official for a favored few private entities, knowing they will repay her/him directly through campaign contributions.
Do you think that's why the Constitution mandates that Congress' laws must apply to all citizens, and never just a select group?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment