With passage of HCR38 on Thursday, a new message of opposition was circulated among the Sussex County republicans who opposed the resolution as it was written.

Several members said it was wrong for state government to force two companies to do business.

That is an interesting claim that bears some scrutiny.

Is it wrong for a government to impose the people’s will upon a business?

At first, it seems to go against every libertarian grain deeply embedded within the American psyche. We fought for our right to be free of excess government, and we continually fight that battle to preserve those rights.

If we broke away from our mother country over a tax imposed on our consumption of tea……….how can we justify government intervention into the give and take of what goes on within our businesses?

Now forgive me for making a jump here……but to get to the right answer, we need first to determine who, or what, our government is?

If we take the assumption that our government is an entity imposed upon me by another who has goals differing drastically in a direction from mine, then that government’s intervention could by a stretch, be considered inappropriate at worst, and un-American at best……

The opposing point of view is that if our government represents us, and the businesses it oversees, is a representative of another who has goals differing drastically from the direction of mine, then……we have the opposite effect. Lack of intervention would be deemed inappropriate at worst, as well as un-American at best.

So to get to the essence of the question, we have to first figure out who is more representative of our needs and wishes………………

Lets do so by poking around this scenario.

Obviously I should be allowed to charge citizens $5 for a gallon of gas. If you have no choice but to buy from me, then good for me….bad for you. This economic philosophy is often spouted by those who contemporarily have the economic upper hand, and is politcally embodied by whichever party of the time, chooses to stake the ground those upper handed stand upon, and grovel for their crumbs.

But failing any competition, you take it on the chin every time you buy my gas. You are paying an excess charge just to make me rich. As you suffer, the entire economy also suffers by siphoning away monies needed elsewhere, to expand my pockets. I have no incentive to abstain from hurting you. (Hmmm…why stop at $5. I think I’ll raise it to $6)

For our government (which is supposed to represent YOU) to sit idly by and do nothing because of a silly political principal, results in a failure to do its job in representing you, the very people who elected it to govern.

So the underlying principle that needs to be settled in order to appropriately answer this question, is this: Is our government elected to represent us…….or our businesses and corporations.

As all should do whenever such questions arise, we should turn our attention to our founding document. In this case, I think attention to the Constitution is appropriate. It begins with “WE, the People.” What It does not say is “We, the Corporation.” In fact, corporations are mentioned nowhere in the original Constitutional document. It would be wise to remember that people vote in every election, whereas, corporations do not.

Therefore when our government has to choose between the corporation and a person, one would always expect the cause of a person to trump that of a corporation. The only leg a corporation has to stand on in this country is …….( and we owe Alexander Hamilton kudos for bringing this up), that the economic well being of a corporation often benefits many far and beyond the one or two individuals in the process of opposing them…………….

Bottom line is this. That in this great country, “WE, the People” should always have our wants, wishes, and wills respected. The only time we get into trouble, is where various factions of ourselves, have opposing wants, wishes, and wills. As a nation, we circumvented this problem by outlining clearly, that indecision would be settled throughout our future, by a flat out vote. Whoever won the majority, would decide the issue.

90% of Delawareans want an offshore wind farm. The majority is obvously there. Delmarva, who by lot, circumstance, and history, happens to be the entitity that currently supplies our power, does not want that windfarm…….

So we vote.

The majority wins.

End of controversy.

In God we Trust……..