Recently, the governors of New York and New Jersey sent a joint letter to Congressional leaders expressing their outrage that the “fiscal cliff” legislation did not include more than $50 billion in federal aid for damages caused by Hurricane Sandy. Although the federal aid is likely to be approved by mid-January, this minor delay was deemed an outrage by the two governors, who said: “When American citizens are in need we come to their aid. That tradition was abandoned in the House last night.”

In fact, the real American tradition has been to help neighbors recover through voluntary aid and private investment. Prior to about 1964, most Americans would have been dumbstruck at the attitude of politicians who think federal taxpayers “owe” them billions of dollars in relief. Apparently, federal disaster relief is now another entitlement program, along with Social Security, Medicaid, and food stamps.

Since I have friends and family living in Manhattan, I certainly feel for those whose homes have been destroyed by Sandy, and I’m willing to help financially if asked politely. But when elected officials start acting like spoiled teenagers and “demand” that I turn over part of my income for their constituents, I feel a lot less charitable.

John A. Charles, Jr. is President and CEO of Cascade Policy Institute, Oregon’s free market public policy research organization.

 

2 Responses to “Federal Relief Aid Is the New Entitlement”

  1. Toni January 19, 2013 at 4:28 am #

    Thank you for your comments, John. I live in Josephine County, where 47% of our residents feel “entitled” to some kind of govt assistance. Many of them are third-generation “entitleds” and complain when the assistance is not given quick enough. Living off the govt has become a way of life for some people, and the rest of us are getting pretty tired of footing the bill. My grandparents, who lived through the Depression, would not have considered taking govt assistance.

  2. Michael Wagoner January 22, 2013 at 1:07 am #

    I have to agree with your assessment. While it is natural and correct to feel badly for those who have suffered loss from a natural disaster, those people are not automatically entitled to immediate compensation.
    This is just another example of entitlement thinking trumping all other thinking when the funds are coming from “someone else” (either taxes or borrowing).

Leave a Reply

 

Other Publications by John

The Demise of the Highway Trust Fund: A Market Solution

John Charles | August 12, 2014
  In the 1967 film The Graduate, Dustin Hoffman plays a nerdy twenty-something who suffers through an unwanted college graduation party hosted by his parents. ...  read more

Time for a Third Bridge to Vancouver

John Charles | July 30, 2014
Last week a conceptual plan for a new bridge over the Columbia River was unveiled at a public forum in Vancouver, WA. The plan, presented ...  read more

Are You Being Scammed on Your Electric Bill?

John Charles | June 13, 2014
During the past decade, it has become popular for individuals, businesses, and universities to brand themselves as “green power” supporters. Some have done this by ...  read more

More On These Topics

Charter Schools Achieve Superior Outcomes with Unequal Funding

Kathryn Hickok | August 20, 2014
The University of Arkansas has published a first-ever comparison study of cost effectiveness and return on investment between different types of public schools. The Productivity ...  read more

Join a Union or Pay? Not So Fast, Say Oregonians

Kathryn Hickok | August 13, 2014
A public opinion poll released this week reveals that 84% of Oregonians agree that employees should have the right to decide, without force or penalty, ...  read more

Sustainability Is Fine, Unless There’s Nothing Left to Sustain

Steve Buckstein | August 6, 2014
The University of Oregon may hire four new “hot shot” sustainability professors whose mission will be to “change the world by figuring out how to ...  read more