|
The
front doorbell rang. That means that it had to have been a
stranger. All of our friends use our side door. So, I exited
out of the side door and greeted a smiling, young man who
identified himself as being affiliated with a group known as
"The Citizens Action Committee". He politely
explained that he was involved with an effort to lower
prescription drug prices here in the state. The following is a
rather hastily reconstructed and somewhat paraphrased account
of our exchange.
Activist
(as he hands me a clipboard): We are taking contributions as
we canvass the area.
Me:
How do you propose to lower prescription drug prices?
Activist:
We intend to lobby the state legislators to pass the piece of
legislation that you see listed here on the petition.
Me:
Oh, I see. A political solution.
Activist:
Yes, we would like to see the state government buy drugs in
bulk quantity and pass the discount on to the consumers. We
could save as much as 40%.
Me:
What about the free market?
Activist:
We trusted in the free market, but it let us down. The free
market is what gave us these high drug prices.
Me:
The free market didn't let you down. Government interference
in the market caused the drug prices to increase by inhibiting
the free market process.
Activist:
But the free market caused these big pharmaceutical companies
to get big and then charge exorbitant prices.
Me:
No, it didn't. The state protected these pharmaceutical
companies with their various agencies. The state says who is
allowed to write prescriptions, as well as make and sell the
pharmaceutical drugs. The state regulations keep others out of
the drug business, and as a consequence, allow the
pharmaceutical companies to have free reign. What would be the
advantage of the state becoming a middleman for drug
consumers?
Activist:
The state will be able to negotiate prices.
Me:
Actually, the state will be fixing prices.
Activist:
But, the free market doesn't work.
Me:
It would work if we really had a free market.
Activist:
Well, how do you define the free market?
Me:
Basically, the free market is any voluntary exchange where
there is no state interference.
Activist:
Well, we don't have that because there is state interference
in everything.
BINGO!
Now, the libertarian communicator Michael Cloud would be proud
of me. I believe that he calls this
"intellectual judo." I'm going to come clean
with all of the Root Strikers. I really didn't intend that
this well-meaning young man would see things my way. But, he
did admit that we don't really have a free market.
There
was a lot more that I discussed with the activist. I must give
him much credit for dealing with my incessant argumentation.
Shortly afterward, I felt somewhat saddened. I tried so hard
to make my point about the fact that the state is not your
friend. Ten years ago, I was somewhat involved in the pro-life
movement. I finally realized that the state doesn't really
care all that much about protecting life. I'm still as
pro-life as I have always been. I just don't look to the state
to help promote my pro-life views.
Pick
a cause, any cause. Take some energetic individuals who are
willing to fight for the cause. They band together and form a
"grass roots coalition.” They canvass a neighborhood,
get donations and signatures. They go and lobby the
legislators. They demand accountability. It's called the
political solution. I call it a waste of time.
I
tried to make this very point with the political activist. He
claimed that they were successful. Their success story had to
do with preventing Enron from mining in Northern Wisconsin. He
puffed up his chest and said, "We got Enron out of
Wisconsin. They can't pollute the Wolf River." My reply
was, "So, who owns the land now?" He said, "the
state government." Oh, ye suckers! You have played right
into the hands of the state. My only reply to that was that
the state shouldn't own any land.
I'm
looking forward to having dialogue again someday with any
political activist. There are always opportunities for us to
promote liberty and free markets. It just makes me wonder why
anyone would waste his or her time and effort with the
political solution.
 |
July
23, 2002
|
|