Do we want governmental involvement or not?

Several years ago, in California there was a huge push by the insurance industry to encourage legislators to pass laws requiring different types of insurance, automobile insurance being the most apparent. Car insurance is obviously something that is important to have. Few would argue against the merits of the purchase, but it may outside the scope of responsibility for the state to interfere in the lawful interaction of two private entities.

But, the legislature and governor, in all of their wisdom, choose to become involved in the insurance industry. However, if they were going to mandate the purchase of insurance, they had to make sure that policies would be available. Companies registered to sell insurance in California were forced to provide policies, whether or not those policies were economically prudent to sell. Consumers in less risky situations were forced to pay for the more hazardous insureds. The providers would be made to behave in manner acceptable to those politicians. California had to set up a greater bureaucracy to oversee all of the workings of an industry that Sacramento had no experience in running. Politicians felt they had the right to make demands on not only the consumers, but also on the providers.

Wait, cried the insurance companies!! Some of the demands were not in the best interest of either the customers nor of the insurance corporations. Too bad, open the door for the bureaucrats to start controlling a segment of the economy and decisions previously made by those with the experience, education and knowledge of the industry are now made by folks with motivation, experience and a worldviews outside of what might be expected for that industry.

Fast forward to today. In times of upheaval (sometimes manufactured upheaval) there are many examples of entities willing to take advantage of our desire for stability and safety to grab a little more control. When we dont know history, we are doomed to repeat it.

From Briton, according to a Federation of Small Businesses press release, Mr. John Wright , National Chairman said, "We want the storm of recession to end and small businesses are the sector to see us through it. We have already seen some measures to help small businesses through these difficult times but we need to see more: we need to see the banks lending again, suppliers paying up on time and burdensome regulation being delayed." That speech could easily have been made by our NFIB Board Chairman Timothy C. Clayton.

I agree with Mr. Wright that small business will have to be the answer to the economic difficulties that we are experiencing. I also agree that we "need to see the banks lending again, suppliers paying up on time and burdensome regulation being delayed" if those actions can occur without governmental interference.

When we open the door to allow legislative or administrative meddling, we have trouble closing it again when it comes to things like regulations, and oversight. Often times, we want the goodies when they are being handed out, but dont understand that with the gold comes the person that makes the rules. Those rules are made by individuals who may or may not have the best interest of the business owner at heart.

Thomas Sowell, noted economist, explained that we now have a situation where people with no knowledge of running the financial institutions in this country (or many other countries) are putting themselves in the position of running those institutions. The same can be said of the automotive industry, the securities industries and others. Small business gets caught up in the very broad nets being cast.

I truly believe that the best and fastest way to economic recovery is through small business success. I am not willing to gain that recovery at the cost of the autonomy of the owners of those businesses

Small business can only take care of our problems when it is left alone to do what it does best.