Lots of you have sent me his last two columns, both of which addressed the obesity issue and — surprise! — called for immediate and significant government intervention. Frankly, the columns are such vague pronouncements devoid of any support, they’re really not worthy of a response. Except for this:

Above all, we need to put aside our anti-government prejudices and realize that the history of government interventions on behalf of public health, from the construction of sewer systems to the campaign against smoking, is one of consistent, life-enhancing success.

Um, alcohol prohibition? I’d add drug prohibition, too. And I’d argue (though Krugman would certainly disagree) that the FDA has cost more lives by dragging its feet while allowing drugs to get to market than it has saved by keeping other drugs off the shelves. And Krugman would probably agree with me that abstinence-only education does more harm than good. Here’s a letter I sent to the NY Times:

Editor,

Paul Krugman writes in his July 8 column, “Above all, we need to put aside our anti-government prejudices and realize that the history of government interventions on behalf of public health . . . is one of consistent, life-enhancing success.”

Mr. Krugman seems to have forgotten about alcohol prohibition, the grandest, most invasive, most sweeping public health initiative ever undertaken by the federal government. It failed. Many would argue that the war on drugs has wrought similar results, having severely restricted civil liberties and overcrowded our prisons, while failing to reduce both the supply and demand for illicit substances. Further, many economists believe that the public campaign to reduce smoking has been a major contributor to our increasing girth.

Legitimate public health measures protect the public from threats to which no reasonable person would subject himself — threats like communicable disease, or biological and chemical terrorism. Beyond that, government is merely protecting us from ourselves — policing our personal lives for bad habits. Such measures are not only bound to fail, but also threaten our personal freedom, and often bring awful unintended consequences.

Radley Balko
Policy Analyst
Cato Institute

This entry was posted on Friday, July 8th, 2005 at 10:48 am by Radley Balko and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.