Mr. Mero raises some excellent points, but we should apply some facts to his inaccurate rhetoric.
A key tenet of his argument is: "Red state" communities will handle the hurricane Katrina disaster better than "blue state" communities because red state people are more self-sufficient and less government dependent.
Perhaps Mr. Mero is unaware that this is a well-studied issue and the answer is unambiguous. Certain states have a high level of dependency on the federal government and it is the red states - not blue states - that are dependent. Even more interesting is that the sources of these studies are conservative groups - including the Tax Institute and the Texas A&M Private Enterprise Research Center.
They examine which states receive back more in federal benefits than they pay in taxes. If a state receives back more than it pays in, that state is clearly federal-government dependent.
So how many "blue states" (states that voted for Kerry in 2004) are among the top 15 most "dependent" states? One: Hawaii. So who are the most dependent? Rock-ribbed conservative bastions like Alabama (sixth), Alaska (second), North Dakota (fourth), South Carolina (15th) and Virginia (eighth). And what about Mississippi, where Mero's "rural red state community" heroes live? Mississippi ranks third in government dependency.
So what about those dastardly liberal states in the Northeast and on the left coast? Clearly, those states - being full of city-slicker liberals - must also be full of government dependents. Well, actually, the data show that those dastardly liberals pay all the taxes and get none of the benefits.
On the government-dependency scale, the people from New Jersey, the most urban state in the nation, rank last (50th); they get back 52 cents of every dollar they pay in taxes. What about those liberal New Yorkers? They rank 42nd. Californians? They rank 43rd. And what about the biggest liberal bogey-man of all: Massachusetts - no wait - Taxa-chusetts? They get back 78 cents of every federal tax dollar they contribute putting them 44th lowest on the government-dependency scale.
And we self-reliant Utahns? Well, we rank 22nd, near the middle, but we get back $1.19 in benefits for every $1 we contribute in taxes. Yes, we Utahns are government-dependent. (I assume Mr. Mero would like us to kick out our clearly liberal congressional delegation and replace them with true conservatives who will not insist on our being so dependent on federal funds!)
So now that we have established that it is the red states that are government-dependent, we can turn to the question of self-reliance in the wake of Katrina. It is clear now that everyone did not have the same capacity to be "self-reliant." Should the elderly residents of the private, corporately owned St. Rita's Nursing Home, where 34 residents drowned because the owners of the facility refused to evacuate them, be blamed for not being "self-reliant"?
What about the elderly and infirm and the poor? Should we just blithely say that they should be self-reliant without considering the reasons why they may not have been able to get out of harm's way?
Perhaps instead of blaming government dependency, we should examine the role that government should play to those in need. There are many places to find wisdom about the role of government. Consider, for example, Psalm 72, where King Solomon asks God for power and for justice as he rules over the people of Israel.
Why does he ask for this? So King Solomon can "deliver the needy who cry out, the afflicted who have no one to help [them]." He will take pity on the weak and the needy and save the needy from death. He will rescue them from oppression and violence."
---
Thad Hall is an assistant professor of political science at the University of Utah.
