People are always wondering how we should pay for all the various government services that we currently offer. While libertarians and other proponents of limited government might simply say that these sorts of things shouldn’t be offered at all -- which would undoubtedly solve the budget problem but could very easily create other problems -- there are other alternatives.

There are, of course, the two routes that our politicians seem to adore: cut other services to pay for the “important” ones (Republicans) or raise taxes to pay for all of them (Democrats).  We have seen where those two roads lead, and the ongoing battle over our budget combined with the still-looming possibility of a government shutdown is evidence that balancing the two favored approaches is not an easy act.  Tempers flare, people make impassioned pleas on behalf of their pet projects and services, and then there are inevitable human-interest stories showing the people affected.

Fortunately, there is another alternative.  We may absolutely insist that the government offers a particular service, but do we really have to insist that it is the government that administers the service?  Probably not.  So long as entitlements get funded, people don’t really seem to mind who is doing the actual work -- government employees or private workers.

A great (and current) example of this is the case that Delegate Mark N. Fisher is making for privatizing the Intercounty Connector (ICC) -- and all the state’s highway rest stops too.  Basically, the idea would be that the state would still own these assets but would sell the rights to operate them to private investors.  In other words: the Maryland government would get to sit back and collect the proceeds while someone else did all the work!

The practice is not an uncommon one.  In fact, entrepreneurs and venture capitalists have been using it since the dawn of business.  If you have money and assets then you don’t necessarily want to work -- you want to invest.  You delegate the responsibilities (in exchange for a share of the profits) and then you sit back and rake in the dough.

And how are the profits, you might ask?  Fisher mentions that Connecticut recently moved to privatize all 23 of their rest stops and pulled in $178 million!  It might be chump change to the government, but to almost everyone else that is a significant (perhaps astronomical) savings.  And if we stand to make such quick, easy cash from privatizing our rest stops, imagine all the other opportunities for privatization in our state.

Finally, the major benefit of privatization should not go unmentioned here.  Anyone who has ever been to a private Tag, Title, and Registration office instead of the MVA knows how much quicker and easier the process can be.  Private businesses are almost always more efficient than the government because their scope is so much smaller.  Simply put: privatization works.

If the government were merely overseeing all the various programs and services they currently offer and not attempting to administer them, we would likely see decreasing deficits (which would soon mean lower taxes) and increased efficiency (which could mean even lower taxes).  We know privatization and competition works -- that’s why we’re not still attempting the same failed experiment as the former USSR.  So why not take full advantage?