Is it Really Hypocrisy?

SEPTEMBER 1, 2010 E-MAIL THIS PRINTER FRIENDLY

Should states suing to block the implementation of ObamaCare accept federal money that is authorized by the law? That question is in the air as seven states suing over the new federal health care law also applied to receive funding under it to help pay for state retiree retirement. I’m not so sure that the charge of hypocrisy is relevant here, though, or in other instances where it is thrown at those who favor limited government and yet use government services.

I think we can all agree that the most principled thing one can do if you are opposed to certain government programs is not to have anything to do with them. As someone who went to one of the few colleges in the nation that refuses to accept any form of federal student aid (including student loans), that is an appealing idea to me.

There is another way to look at it, though. We are all taxed to pay for federal programs whether we agree with them or not. So why should anyone who qualifies not take advantage of these programs? My grandfather was a farmer who often said that if he were in Congress he would support abolishing farm subsidies, but if the they existed it made no sense to impoverish himself and refuse them.

It really doesn’t make any sense for people who qualify for Social Security or Medicare or Medicaid to refuse these government programs, regardless of the recipients’ political beliefs. The charge of hypocrisy is legitimately raised only when people advocate limited government for everyone else except themselves.

There are many examples of this. In my own county of Wicomico, for instance, there is a Libertarian running for county council whose main pronouncements in public meetings have been to preserve government subsidies for a community center and library in his area of the county. He wants the county budget cut for every program except those he enjoys. Or another individual active in the limited government movement wants government spending cut but is always hectoring legislators to institute a state subsidy that will benefit his business. I think it’s proper to label these individuals as hypocrites.

Similarly, people who want government spending cut but oppose efforts to reduce federal outlays on Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, the programs largely driving our nation’s fiscal problems, are properly labeled as hypocrites. Or those who proclaim their allegiance to the free market and yet turn around and support government policies that interfere with the free market in labor (including foreign labor) are probably hypocrites.

So are the states in question that are accepting ObamaCare money being hypocritical? I don’t think so. They would be fine if the law was repealed. But if it is in place, why should they have to pay for the law’s costs without receiving any of its benefits? Why should their state’s taxpayers be forced to shoulder a larger burden than other states’ taxpayers?

There are plenty of hypocrites in the political arena. But I don’t think the charge applies in this instance. But as Dennis Miller always used to say, of course, that’s just my opinion, I could be wrong.

No comments available

Name *
E-mail *
Response *


* = Required

Is it Really Hypocrisy?

Post Your Comment Here

Policy Blog