Was Justin Amash betraying his principles when he suggested monthly checks for American citizens for the duration of the COVID-19 crisis?
This is an opinion article from the editor, taken from a segment of the May 5th issue of From the Hawk’s Nest, a bi-weekly newsletter.
There was a lot of serious confusion the other week when Justin Amash, Libertarian congressman and candidate for president, suggested sending monthly checks to American citizens for the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic.
After all, that sounds a lot like proposals for a Universal Basic Income (UBI). And a UBI would be a pretty significant doubling (tripling?) down on the massive Welfare State that’s come into existence over the last hundred years. So, why on earth would a Libertarian, of all people, call for something that sounds pseudo-socialist?
The answer is simple: the economy is suffering and people are losing their jobs, not in response to any kind of market forces, but because the government has shut the economy down. The government, by wielding emergency powers in response to the pandemic, is the disrupting force in this scenario.
Justin Amash is no less a Libertarian for suggesting the government should take responsibility for the consequences of its actions for as long as its actions continue to disrupt the free market.
And, frankly, sending out checks to citizens while the government is disrupting the economy presents a far more free-market-oriented solution than anything else the government could do. What Amash is suggesting would be giving money to consumers so they can decide how to help themselves and how to best reinvigorate the economy.
While, yes, it’s still the government doling out checks, it would at least constitute a surrender by the government of its instinct to micro-manage economic recovery. It would allow the free market to tread water, instead of drowning, while establishing a jump-start to the free market when the pandemic finally fully lifts. Monthly checks under these circumstances would not constitute a UBI.
While Amash’s suggestion of monthly government payments has been shocking for some, it’s a great demonstration of just how different a Libertarian candidate he is. It’s an excellent example of how to apply principles pragmatically.
Amash recognizes just how real the current economic disruption is. He knows the economy will not repair itself without a significant depression period. And, it seems he sees the awful potential for massive growth of government intervention in response to such a depression (which is easy to recognize given the public demand for the enormous growth of government that ensued from the Great Depression).
A pragmatic Libertarian, such as what Amash seems to present himself as, is willing to do what must be done to keep the elements for a true and massive expansion of government power from establishing themselves. He’s willing to sit at the table of discussion during times of emergency to better ensure any measures the government takes will remain temporary measures.
Without the engagement of politicians like Justin Amash, who’s to say advocates for expanded centralized power wouldn’t have more effectively used the crisis as an argument to establish a policy that really would amount to a Universal Basic Income and increased perpetual dependence of citizens on their government.
In this specific instance, it’s not principles betrayed, but principles applied.
For more insights and hot-takes, be sure to subscribe to From the Hawk’s Nest, a bi-weekly newsletter from Justin Stapley:
