I wish a debate moderator would ask the Republican presidential candidates how their version of limited government would respond to the Zika virus crisis that is standing on our Nation’s front porch and knocking on the door. Will Trump be erecting a mile-high mosquito net across our southern border to prevent the virus carriers from crossing into U.S. airspace? Since the virus is also sexually transmitted, will Cruz block government payments to any doctor who prescribes contraceptives? Will Carson require virus carriers to register? Would Christie quarantine them? Would Rubio deport anyone who sleeps with them? Would Carly Fiorina scowl at them and hope they run away? Those are questions I’d like to see answered, because the current outbreak of the Zika virus, like last year’s brush with Ebola in Africa, is a quickly spreading epidemic that could easily turn into a pandemic. If or when that happens, the type of government response that is offered by the United States will depend heavily on the philosophy of the President in charge of it.
We saw what a limited government response was like when hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans and the gulf coast in August of 2005. President Bush’s idea of limited government failed to mobilize in advance of the hurricane and failed to respond to initial calls for federal emergency assistance. We’re seeing what limited government advocates – our Republican Congress – are doing today by refusing federal funds for the needed repairs to the Flint, Michigan water system. Never mind that thousands of Flint residents were poisoned by state advocates of limited government who deemed saving money more important than providing safe drinking water for their citizens.
If the United States offers a limited government response to the coming Zika epidemic, thousands of newborn children will suffer life-threatening medical conditions and eventually die from them. It won’t be pretty, but then again in this day and age, limited government never is.
No comments:
Post a Comment