by Jed Estrada

On July 30th, President Bush signed a bipartisan bill to increase the money spent on AIDS in Africa from 15 billion, to 48 billion. This historic bill is what Bush calls a picture of the generosity of the American people, which the Wall Street Journal reports will save 5 to 7 lives. people. Since the benefit of life is so significant, I would be very reluctant to criticize such an expensive gift. But I am left to wonder whether our government is just looking for opportunities to spend money. I don't know how many people can grasp the concept of a multi-trillion dollar national deficit, but it basically means that the next several generations are going to be paying off our nations debt. Our leaders may have promised that they wouldn't raise taxes, but by spending so much on credit they are essentially passing the bill down to the next generation.

On the same day that President Bush approved the AIDS package for Africa, he also signed a bill to bail out  the gigantic Freddie Mae and Fanny Mac organizations, and cover up to 400,000 home owners, according to the Wall Street Journal's Market Watch. It is one thing that the government has spent billions of dollars on disaster relief. It is still another that it spends additional billions on disaster relief in other countries. But for the government to become involved in the 'free market' is a vast overstepping of it's constitutional bounds, and will invariably cause further problems for the market. Not only does this give government a foot in the door of the market, it also opens up dependency for yet another area... our failures. The market bill also included a provision to create a federal backstop to ensure the future stability of the mortgage giants. Businessmen learn judgment and discernment for a reason, so that their companies don't go bankrupt. But now the government has sent the message that they will bail out important corporations who go broke.

So doe generosity and good intentions make it right? Giles St. Aubyn, an author and historian said "It is melancholy to reflect that Mankind has suffered more from ill-judged philanthropy than calculated malice. The road to hell is no less harrowing for being paved with good intentions." To give a gift is a worthy thing, but not if it is not yours to give. It is one thing that our government wishes to use its taxpayers' money abroad, but it is quite another to borrow money against the future, and bind that future in debt. Just because the government deals in the trillions of dollars doesn't mean that basic principles of economics and saving do not apply.

The Heritage Foundation, a research and educational think tank published an article entitled My Neighbor's Keeper? Rethinking Responsibility and the Role of Government, in which it noted that "Government is not solely-- or even primarily--responsible for taking care of our neighbors. That responsibility belongs to each one of us as participants in a variety of relationships and overlapping communities."

So what is our Christian responsibility? When the Bible says to give to Caesar the things that belong to Caesar and to God the things that belong to God, it is addressing an individual responsibility. Our taxes are due to our government, and our gifts are due to God. The AIDS crisis in Africa may be beyond individual generosity, but the poor of our community are always with us. Just because our government gives welfare to the needy in society, doesn't mean that we don't have a responsibility to minister to them. To sit back and ignore them just because they have handouts from the government will only cause more dependency, and make it harder for them to achieve success. An old Chinese proverb says "Give a man a fish, and you have fed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you have fed him for his life."  As we reach out to help our neighbors, we can teach them to be responsible instead of dependent, and perhaps our politicians will learn to temper their generosity with prudence.