Compassionate Conservatism

A good article by the man who helped coin the term. It is unfortunate that the concept of compassionate conservatism has been misunderstood and deliberately distorted. According to Marvin Olasky,

One compassionate conservative goal was to encourage average citizens to help the poor directly, instead of handing off all the responsibility to government officials. Another goal was to end government discrimination against faith-based groups that were often the most effective poverty-fighters. Those goals were both expenditure-neutral: They suggested neither bigger nor smaller budgets, but a different way of spending.

My biggest complaint about government programs is that they tend to create roadblocks to people getting real and lasting help. They promote what I call an attitude of governmentalism. I see three marks of governmentalism.

• (1) An entitlement mentality, not only in the people who receive the benefits of the entitlement but especially in the people who disperse the benefits. A good illustration of this can be seen here in California, where the Teacher's Union and the Public School Establishment are throwing fits because the Governator is not giving them the money they think they are entitled to.
• (2) A proprietary and protectionist perspective, even in the face of clear evidence that their program is not working. One reason for creating bureaucratic red tape is that it gives that particular department or program a sense of power and control. "Only we can do this."
• (3) An antagonistic attitude toward private sector programs that can do a better job, particularly faith based programs.
  

I am a compassionate conservative in the sense that I believe that individual and community help is almost always more effective than state and federal governmentalism. The more of our money we get to those on the ground, the more effective we will be.