Legislature, do no harm

“The most formidable weapon against errors of every kind is Reason.”

Thomas Paine, 1794

Thomas Paine goes on to state, “The natural rights of man are absolute, which leaves men free to discuss with reason, evidence and opinion the establishment of governmental actions by consent and not by dictatorial agents or would-be saviors.”

In the context of our founding fathers, establishment of a state of reality is experienced when two or more individuals use opinion formation, evidence and reason to agree upon situations. When an agreement becomes common to the defined set of people, a “truth” is established as a consensual reality. This is the process by which public policy is formulated in the legislative process by consent of the people.

The state of reality to which Gov. Sarah Palin refers in her Spectrum column headlined “Oil tax requires balanced fine tuning” (Nov. 3 Frontiersman) is a honorable and sound opinion based upon truth-seeking efforts established by her world view. It may very well be the best course of action to follow — or not. It surely is a strong opinion having come from an individual in high authority and holding high public esteem. It must be emphasized that it is her opinion, not a decree to compliance.

Taking in consideration the wants and needs of the public opposed with the volatility of the global energy markets and our economical dependency on the oil industry, benefits are sought, but risks are potentially high. It is imperative our lawmakers use public consent, reasoning and truth seeking principles similar to the ones used by medicine to formulate diagnoses and remedy implementations. This will maximize the beneficial outcome for the public without subjecting it to immediate or future harm.

To that end, the practitioner must identify by reason all of the positive outcomes as well as the negative ones. There is a longstanding edict in medicine to “do no harm.” What that means is if the practitioner is unable to verify the extent of all the bad outcomes, which in this case could include suppression of future oil exploration or investment, a new treatment regime would be:

1. Do nothing and seek more evidence.

2. Seek the most conservative approach that offers known outcomes for all involved.

It is better to find reason and truth in cautious analysis than blunder by authoritative decree and later find reason and truth in autopsy.

Catherine Mormile

Wasilla