During a 2000 gubernatorial debate in Indiana, Libertarian candidate Andrew Horning said that “asking a Libertarian to support a tax cut is like asking Tiger Woods to swing a golf club”. With this in mind, it should come as no great surprise that the Tulsa Area Libertarians (TAL), a Tulsa-based political action group, is calling for a “No” vote on May 8th. It is necessary to explain why that is, and what is being proposed in the absence of the revenue generated by the third-penny sales tax, which such a vote would repeal.
It is common for Libertarians to oppose tax increases, tax continuances, and bond issues. Government today at all levels is operating far outside of its rightful domain, and as a result the efficient and effective delivery of many goods and services is disrupted. Regardless of the many promises made by government, it cannot adequately perform functions best left to the private sector, and every penny taken from citizens by government is one less penny individuals have to fund the competent provision of necessary services themselves.
On a more philosophical level, Libertarians say that the only thing government should do (what we refer to as its legitimate functions), is protect individual citizens against acts of force and fraud. More precisely, government’s only moral function is to protect the rights of its citizens. Libertarians believe, therefore, that the only functions of government consistent with that principle are those that directly contribute to the protection of the rights of individuals. In short, government should provide an army to protect our borders, policemen to respond to emergency calls, and courts to settle inevitable civil and criminal disputes.
Services like the provision of streets and sewers, and the maintenance of a city fire department do not exist to protect individual rights, and should therefore be removed from the purview of government and left to the free-market and private initiative. Instead, when an opportunity to lower taxes presents itself City leaders always point to the funding of these very services as a reason to maintain current tax levels. When privatization is offered as an alternative, however, political leaders often suggest that some things just can’t be left to the free market.
But streets and sewers, water and trash service, and fire departments are precisely the first services that anyone interested in decreasing and limiting the power of government should consider returning to the private sector. The history of volunteer fire departments is itself an indication of how individuals, working collectively, solved a common societal problem. Because of the sheer size of cities today, versus the relatively small urban areas of yesteryear, it isn’t likely that such a volunteer force would be very effective in Tulsa, though outlying areas like Berry Hill or Turley could certainly utilize them with success.
What is more likely to happen in a private fire-protection environment is that insurance companies would begin contracting fire service with massive “fire protection” corporations, who would specialize in city-wide service to protect the mortgaged properties of their clients. Individuals would likely also invest in additional coverage as well, just as “contents” insurance is often purchased along with “home insurance” now paid for as part of a mortgage.
Streets, sewers, water and trash services would also be an easy task for the private sector. Already in Tulsa County private trash pick-up is flourishing, with three companies competing for customers. If any doubt about the efficacy of such private service still remains, one need only remember that city residents, by and large, would like to see such competition extended to inside the city limits. By contrast, people in the County aren’t exactly howling for their private service to be taken over by the public sector, the surest sign that prices are lower and service is better.
Water service is also leaning towards private initiative, even without an overt policy of privatization. The prevalence of water filter systems in the city, along with the boom in bottled and filtered drinking water, is the greatest symbol that individuals are frustrated with government incompetence. Even after considering the tax bill, Tulsa’s residents are paying out even more money to make sure the water they drink and bath in is healthy and free of pollutants. Imagine the number of people that could afford whole-home water filter systems (about $100 a month) if their City of Tulsa bill was cut in half (if not more) and a penny (for starters) was removed from the sales tax burden?
One must also remember that the laws of economics would also bring beneficial results: When Tulsans began demanding more water-purification, more companies would enter the market. The resultant competition would lower prices even more.
Streets and highways, though admittedly a more complicated issue, could still be effectively built, maintained, and funded by the private sector.1 The gross incompetence in the government-controlled transportation infrastructure of this city is infamous. It is time to explore a different approach.
In conclusion, the Libertarian position on the May 8th sales tax vote is simple. Any reduction in the tax burden currently carried by the citizens of Tulsa should be welcomed, particularly when the money being collected is used to fund services not consistent with the preservation of individual rights. Libertarians believe that government’s frequent ventures outside its moral purview lead to market distortion, higher prices, and bad service. The Tulsa Area Libertarians encourage voters to vote against a continuation of the third-penny sales tax on May 8th.
04/22/01
910 words
1For a more extensive opinion on private roads see
“Is
it time for private roads?”, by Scott McPherson, Media Bypass magazine