I never cease to be amazed at how the issues that the Republican and Democratic parties address seem to skirt the real issues.

One issue that seems to have people, particularly on the Republican side of the coin, riled up is how the government spends the tax-payers money. Not that this is anything new.

The debate between having a bigger government, which provides more service, and a smaller one, which lets people do their own thing, has long been the central argument between our two parties.

If you listen to a good ol’ boy like George dubya for more than five minutes, it’s virtually guaranteed he’ll promise to get your money out of the hands of those Washington politicians.

On the surface, it doesn’t sound like a bad idea. From Ruby Ridge and Waco to the X-Files, there has been a lot happening to cause people to distrust the government.

The problem is that your money has to go somewhere. Do we really need a tax break so that more of our money can go to McDonald’s and Wal-Mart?

Whether we realize it or not, paying taxes is similar to shopping at the mall. We pay taxes to the government in exchange for things like roads, schools and the police. In that respect, it’s no different than exchanging your money at the mall for fleece vests and Furbies.

Granted, it is different in that we are not directly choosing to pay taxes. With a representative democracy such as ours we do not have any direct control over how high our taxes are, or which programs they may go to support.

Even though we may not directly impact which programs receive government funding, we are actively involved in electing the officials that do so. To some degree, those elected officials are accountable to us.

This is the primary difference between the government and say, Chick-fil-A. The local, state and federal budgets are a matter of public record, unlike a private corporation.

Our government does some nasty things, like bombing civilians and perpetuating unrest in non-capitalist countries. On the other hand, Nike extorts cheap labor out of third-world countries, and sells the fruits of their labor for $126 at Foot-Locker.

Both of these are offensive examples of where our money can be spent. At least with the government we have some recourse when our money is mishandled.

Despite what popular opinion may dictate, there are some very essential programs that benefit from government funding. From food stamps to hot lunches, tax money is finding its way to some needy people.

Would anyone really prefer to entrust their money to Philip Morris?

When Republicans, or anyone else, claim to be returning your money, they are only doing it so you will reinvest that money in the private sector, where they will have even more control over it.

They have perpetuated this belief that somehow, by choosing to spend your money at Arby’s instead of BK, you’re exercising some absolute incarnation of your freedom. As a result, people resist almost any suggestion of socialization, or increased government spending, because they believe it is limiting their freedoms.

Our freedoms are far more limited by the oppressive practices of corporations like Wal-Mart than they are by the money we pay in taxes. Americans already pay far lower taxes than anyone in Western Europe.

Republicans like to block movements for universal health care by suggesting it will somehow limit our freedom to choose.

For millions of Americans without health insurance, their freedom would actually be broadened by such an increase in government spending. They could actually choose to receive treatment without being forced into poverty.

Health care is the most prominent example, but there are countless others. Well designed social service programs would give people in poverty the freedom to live their lives. A freedom they are currently deprived of by labor market exploitation, all in the name of a “free” market.

So the next time a politician proposes to get your money out of Washington, keep in mind that the money that does go to Washington does not completely disappear into a sinkhole. Crooked and inappropriate as politicians use of your money may be, and I grant you it is, you are still better off sending your money there than to Coca-Cola.

---

Ben Godar is a senior in sociology from Ames. He is assistant arts & entertainment editor for the Daily.