Green Government

An article published last night in Politico bears the title “Reid woos Scott Brown on jobs bill”.  Scott Brown?  Jobs bill?  But isn’t the idea of a jobs bill–a cute name for more government subsidies and bailouts–diametrically opposed to the fundamental principles of the conservative movement?  If the answer is yes–and it is–one may be left wondering if conservatism is totally opposed to government intervention in industries like education, healthcare, energy, finance, etc.  And what about welfare programs?  Does conservatism require that the government take a hands off approach to public charity?  While it is true that some conservatives disagree with any government interference that extends beyond defense, most would agree that local and state governments should take a very active role in regulating, subsidizing, and overseeing many industries.  What unites all conservatives, and defines the movement as a whole, rather, is the  simple axiom that the Federal Government should not involve itself in any social program.  Leave that stuff to the states, and limit the Federal Government to those powers articulated by the constitution, sans the erroneous meaning that modern poli-sci’s have applied (no, the regulation of commerce among the several states is not an infinite grant of power–it means exactly what it says and nothing more).  The result is a cleaner, greener government that does more on less.  In other words, if liberalism is the political equivalent of a twelve cylinder lamborghini, conservatism is a prius.