Thinking Right or Wrong, Not Left or Right About Government Disaster Relief
Thinking morally Right about disaster relief requires an understanding of the proper role of government—and of human ingenuity and benevolence.
If you’re in Denver on Nov 7 don’t miss this Defenders of Capitalism (with which I’m affiliated) event:
Whether we know or not who our next president is two days after the election, this promises to be a fabulous panel discussion!
Few events tug at our heartstrings as seeing our fellow Americans hit hard and sometimes ruined by natural disasters: landslides, forest fires, earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, tornadoes, winter storms, floods, or hurricanes. We empathize with their plight and often dip into our pockets, or show up in person, to help. We easily put ourselves in their shoes, and hope that should we be future victims, others would be there for us as well.
In the aftermath of hurricanes Helene and Milton, the federal government declared large areas of Florida, Georgia, South and North Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia disaster areas, qualifying them for relief from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and other government entities. Politicians in office are keen on taking advantage of the positive publicity that comes with touring and offering government support for impacted areas. And their opponents are equally quick at condemning the delays and perceived lack of government support that always seems to be associated with natural disasters. Both groups are experts at cashing in on the aforementioned tugging at the heartstrings.
But is providing disaster relief part of the proper role of government? Is it morally Right to rob Peter to pay disaster-struck Paul? In a society where the government’s role is limited to protecting individual rights, including property rights—that is, in a capitalist society—it is not. In a morally Right society, the government’s role is limited to three functions: (1) protecting us from foreign aggressors (the role of the military), (2) protecting us from domestic aggression such as fraud, theft, murder, etc. (the role of law enforcement), and (3) prosecuting domestic aggressors and settling disputes (the role of the court system). Disaster relief is nowhere to be seen, because it would violate the individual rights of those whose money is taken by force to pay for the relief to those who are affected. At first sight, this may seem cold-hearted. But in rushing to provide government aid, we forget about those who are forced to pay, either with taxes or, if the government runs a deficit, through inflation. What needs and desires go unfulfilled in their lives due to the resulting shortage of funds? What heartbreaks do we cause by violating their rights to keep and spend their hard-earned money?
If the government doesn’t have a role to play, how are natural disasters dealt with in a society that respects and protects individual rights? Through voluntary cooperation and trade in the free marketplace. What forms does it take? Here are a few examples:
Insurance companies play a central role. They assess the risk of natural disasters in a given area and provide insurance (or not) at rates that allow them to make a profit. Risk areas see higher rates, and builders and home- and commercial property owners are more likely to steer clear of them.
It is worth noting that government intrusions into other areas often make the effects of natural disasters worse. For example, subsidized federal flood insurance and state insurance schemes have encouraged construction in flood-prone areas. Absent government involvement, builders and home- and commercial property owners would have had difficulties finding affordable insurance, which would have directed construction to less risky areas, lessening the impact of floods.
Another example is environmental laws and regulations preventing the building of new flood-control measures such as dams, levees, spillways, dikes, etc., and preventing clearing forests on public lands of fire hazards, exacerbating the impact of both floods and forest fires.
When disaster does hit, the insurance companies have mitigation plans in place to quickly remedy the situation. They work with utility, healthcare, retail, and other industries to ensure swift relief to the impacted areas on a scale that FEMA and other government agencies could never manage. Their reputation is on the line, and they know it.
With the knowledge that no FEMA or other government agency will step in, and knowing that their hard-earned money will not be taken by force to be used for causes they don’t support, individual Americans step in and voluntarily donate more funds and time to help the disaster-struck. Americans are the most generous and benevolent people on the planet, and it shows in their willingness to help those who’ve been hard hit through no fault of their own.
Equally important are the long-term preventive measures that are taken when the market is free of government intrusion and all property is privately owned. Dams and other flood-control infrastructure are built, forests are cleared of underbrush, land prone to slides is stabilized, innovation in construction and building materials makes housing and commercial structures better withstand the elements. There’s no end to what human ingenuity can do when not hamstringed by government laws and regulations. And in a not-too-distant future, we’ll finally be able to control the weather, taking the punch out of hurricanes and Nor’easters, and creating rain to prevent wildfire-causing droughts. And someday we’ll even develop technologies to reduce the severity of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions.
On rare occasions, U.S. politicians have acknowledged that the government shouldn’t play a role in disaster relief. In his veto message of the Texas Seed Bill in 1887 aimed at allocating $10,000 for the federal government to purchase seed grain and distribute it to Texas farmers affected by drought, President Grover Cleveland wrote (h/t Helen Raleigh):
"I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution; and I do not believe that the power and duty of the General Government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit...the friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied on to relieve their fellow citizens in misfortune.”
If you’re concerned with the growth and reach of individual rights violating government action, tell your elected representatives to heed Cleveland’s advice and get out of the disaster business.
I agree that the federal government should not be involved in bailing out people who suffer from natural disasters. But it's even worse than you say. There are widespread reports that volunteers trying to help people in Western North Carolina were either discouraged or prohibited from rendering aid. How perverse is that?
In a truly Capitalist society the abundance of wealth would easily provide for the needs of those suffering through natural disasters. The benevolence of the richest, most Capitalist country on Earth, America, has been demonstrated over and over again. Imagine what kind of charitable giving would result if the taxes and regulation were removed from the American people. One other demonstration of the damage the government can do in these situations can be seen in how the government 'handled' the worst natural disaster in the last 100 years, the covid pandemic - hundreds of thousands died, many needlessly, and we ALL are feeling the devastating effects of the inflation caused by the government dumping trillions of worthless dollars into the economy.