COLUMN: Conservatism Gone Wrong

From: Peter Morrison's "Think For Yourself," Fall '95 The recent congressional election makes it rather obvious. This conservatism has been brewing for quite some time and now it has reached fruition with Newt Gingrich and Bob Dole leading the way. Conservatism has taken hold because citizens of the United States are saying today that they can no longer afford to pay for someone else's well-being. Citizens are tired of paying taxes to a government that dumps millions of dollars into inefficient social programs. Citizens are tired of watching their tax dollars support people who have never worked in their life and have no incentive or desire to try and find employment. Conservatives argue that the men and women of this county can no longer afford to waste this money by allowing their hard earned dollars to pay for someone who is taking advantage of the support system established by our government. Citizens today, especially during the recent trying financial times, must be responsible with their dollar, they say. They must choose to feed their own family. They must choose to clothe those they care about most. This is what conservatives -- and many in the mainstream -- voted for in the last election. The sweep of Republicans into Washington sent a clear message -- in today's economic times, we cannot support those who will not work or be productive in society. Citizens have said that the money they earn must be used for their own survival and comfort. The Republicans in Washington read this message loud and clear and will proceed to cut taxes, probably starting with the capital gains tax. Rolled back taxes will put more money in the hands of small businesses and workers, which will put more money back into the system, which will spur the economy. This is the conservative plan. Workers will be able to put their hard earned money to good use without it being taken by the government to fund some domestic program. These scaled-back taxes come with a cost, however. Because citizens say they cannot afford to pay for the government's array of support programs, many of these programs will be cut themselves. The conservatives call for less taxes so citizens can control the fate of their own hard-earned dollar. At the same time, cutting taxes means less funding for social programs including welfare, medicare, medicaid, education reform, homeless shelters, etc. It becomes a trade-off. In today's political environment, the conservatives have chosen to keep their dollar in their pocket and use it how they see fit. As a liberal, I disagree with these choices and am willing to sacrifice for those who cannot provide for themselves. Conservatives believe that people work hard to earn money and then must make tough, real-life decisions with that money. People should not be forced to pay for others; altruism is not mandatory, nor should it be. Those who have jobs must feed their families, and take responsibility for loved ones. I understand this way of thinking. But what the conservative movement has lost sight of is that their decisions have consequences. For every dollar extra you save in reduced taxes, fewer children will be able to find homeless shelters, fewer children will be able to find soup kitchens and fewer children will receive medical care. Conservatives shouldn't be proud of the decision that America is making. Conservatives will tell you that these decisions are financially necessary. But they won't tell you that they have thought about the effects of their political stance. When they see a homeless person, they will not wonder whether the few dollars they saved could have funded another homeless program. The spirit of brotherhood and togetherness that was once held as an American ideal has been replaced with balance sheets and profit margins. And the people who are losing most are the people that need the most help. The conservatives of this country are making a tough choice with their money. It is a decision they feel they must make. But this decision is now often made without remorse, without sympathy, without caring. The decision to be financially responsible comes with the price of human life regardless of whether it is the life of a homeless man or an illiterate child or an ill old woman. Maybe if more conservatives would think about these choices from a more emotional, heartfelt and human perspective, it might change their minds. People with moderate incomes and small upstart struggling businesses often cannot elect to support domestic programs because they simply cannot afford to, but large corporations or financially comfortable families have the opportunity to support those who truly need help. The extra taxes may mean one or two less Friday night movies or one or two less visits to your favorite restaurant, but it also means feeding a homeless baby or buying medical supplies for one more poor person. I may not change your mind regarding your political stance, but remember that this tough choice comes with real living and breathing consequences. Whether people who receive government benefits are actually trying to make it in the world or not, each one of them is a living and breathing human being. And the financial decisions that we make today can alter their lives tomorrow. It is easy to make these choices when citizens think of the homeless as a faceless mass of individuals. Out of sight, out of mind. But maybe if we put a few faces to these same people, we'd think a little bit more with our hearts rather than our heads, and then we may make different choices as a country.