Decency and Humanity Lie in Ashes

When chastised for his biased editing of the British Gazette, Winston Churchill quipped, "I decline utterly to be impartial as between the fire brigade and the fire." This was a great laugh line because the entire English speaking world understood that everyone would be on the side of the heroic firefighters who save people's homes and against the fires that destroy them. Sadly however, this week it's no longer as funny since some right wingers in this country have allied themselves with the flames, applauding a decision in rural Olbion County, Tennessee ordering firefighters to stand idly by and allow a home to burn to the ground because the homeowner didn't pay a $75 dollar fee.

The residents not only lost all of their earthly possessions, but their three dogs and a cat were also burned alive in the blaze. For those of you who aren't animal lovers, I ask you this, what if these pets were children instead? Should we let them die for fear that otherwise people may feel less compelled to pay the $75 fee, or should our basic humanity dictate that a bare minimum level of decency must be maintained, even in the face of a possible revenue decline, which can then be addressed? The homeowner offered to pay the fee, and both he and his neighbor offered to pay the firefighters whatever it cost to put out the fire, but they were told it was too late at that point.

I want to discuss two related though very different groups of people. First, there are those who support the fiscal decision to offer or refuse basic public safety resources like a fire department based on an opt-in fee. They philosophically prefer small, a la carte government and this "pay-to-spray" policy represents such an ideology put into practice. The other group is comprised of those who take delight in this family's tragedy. I want to discuss the second group first.

Glenn Beck and his sidekick spent some time on the radio show not only supporting the decision that forbade the firefighters to extinguish the fire, but also mocking the victim over and over. Beck's point, when he could interrupt his lackey's salting the wounds of the now homeless family, was that if we show any human decency and come to the aid of those who failed to pay the $75, they would be sponging off their neighbors. The one and only thing that both Beck and his co-host blurted out in perfect unison was that if the firefighters had put out the fire, "NO ONE" would play the $75. This speaks volumes about Glenn Beck. In his mind, unless people are allowed to suffer the most gut-wrenching, heartbreaking consequences, 100% of the people will be dishonorable 100% of the time. Luckily, as usual, he's wrong. Most people who expect to receive services pay the required fees whether or not it's possible that they could get away with gaming the system. While we all know this, we need to understand that someone whose entire life revolves around spreading fear and hatred is incapable of seeing humankind's better nature. Of course Beck would never have empathy for the victim because, as he said on national television, empathy leads to genocide. Don't ask me to explain; I can't untangle the twisted and tortured mind of Glenn Beck.

As far as the more tepid supporters of this sad event are concerned, I have to ask you, is this is really the world in which you want to live? First of all, this is a sufficiently obvious pubic good that it should never be considered a luxury item people choose to buy. Even if you somehow reject the notion of fire prevention as part of the public weal, there are any number of better schemes to keep revenues in line with costs than refusing to save the life of someone who failed to pay a small fee. Also, let's consider human error. If you dislike the public sector so much that you would make fire protection a free market option, you very likely believe the government is inept and that clerical errors will abound. If you're right, should the people who live at #145 and paid their fee be left to lose their home or worse because a clerk erroneously posted their payment to #154? Come on, people, we're better than this.

Don't Despair; Churchill Was Right

Winston Churchill once quipped, "The United States invariably does the right thing after having exhausted every other alternative." Left-handed compliment or not, I actually find comfort in those words. We're sometimes late to take our rightful place among the forward thinking, advanced nations of the world, but I believe we'll always get there. In the final analysis, that's what matters most. Let's look at this in the context of capital punishment and our health care system.

In 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Atkins v. Virginia that we could no longer execute the mentally retarded. Then in 2005, in Roper v. Simmons the Court ruled that we couldn't execute those who committed their crimes as juveniles. These are welcome examples of better late than never, but the stumbling path we took to get there certainly supports Churchill's assertion. From the 1980s forward, capital punishment of juvenile offenders separated the U.S. from literally every other country on earth we would consider civilized with respect to human rights. Indeed, except for China and a couple of African counties with dreadful human rights records, it left us with no peers whatsoever except for those we tend to scorn as savage backwaters of Islamic fundamentalism. The message here is that even when things look bleak, we will eventually come around.

With respect to the health care controversy that remains front and center, we currently have a problem that will eventually become a catastrophe if we do nothing but snipe at one another rather than fixing it. This is perhaps the one and only point of universal agreement among all reasonable, well-informed parties no matter where they stand on the proposed reforms. If the current proposals are wrong, then introduce something else and let's debate it. No side has a monopoly on wisdom. It would be a shame to squander this opportunity, particularly if we do so for no better reason than one side's desire to drill a hole on the left side of our collective boat, while they stand on the right side and high-five each, ignoring the seeping water as they celebrate their Pyrrhic victory. There is, however, good news. History has shown us that Churchill was right; even if we can't figure out what to do now, we will eventually find the solution before it's too late. When we do, we will have cast off the distinction of being the only modern, industrialized country that didn't adequately insure all of its citizens, just as we are no longer the only such country to carry out executions that are widely considered barbaric.