Private Sector Solutions Quotes

The Chodorov Principle: For every social problem A caused by government program X, problem A can be solved by abolishing program X.

How do we turn our nation around? President Obama thinks the answer is more and more government. Government is not the answer. You are not doing anyone a favor by creating dependency, destroying individual responsibility.

End results that work that don’t involve government threaten liberals.

I believe the role of the government is too big. Society must be more decentralized.

In doing their work, they [NGOs -- Non-governmental organizations] often end up undermining the government. They hire away its best people, and more fundamentally, their prominence teaches citizens to look to them for service rather than to pressure the government to provide them. This tension between wanting to replace an ineffective state and trying not to undermine it further is a common one faced by outside actors…

I happen to agree with many of the liberal emphasis on compassion, justice and equality. I just disagree that it's the government's role to provide everything.

The conservative movement is about government playing its important yet limited role, and about not falling into the trap of believing that every problem has an exclusive government answer for it.

I get if you're a conservative, and you're saying, I don't know, 'Government shouldn't be mandating what's taught in classrooms,' or, 'Government is too intrusive in our economic life,' well, that's standard conservatism.

More regulation is not the best answer to every problem.

Consistent conservatives believe people should keep more of the money they work so hard to earn - not because the vulnerable don't deserve assistance, but because individuals can and will make better and more effective financial and charitable choices with their money than government bureaucrats.

The right path to health-care reform is the market path (no subsidies, no monopolies such as drug patents, no licensure, no anything) that tends toward universal distribution at very low prices and relentless improvement in service.

The Federal Government should be the last resort, not the first. Ask if a potential program is truly a federal responsibility or whether it can better be handled privately, by voluntary organizations, or by local or state governments.

Activist government overreach and ongoing economic stagnation have shown us why Washington should not try to displace what is best left to civil society.

I think if we had eight or 12 of us in the Senate who came from my business background, you'd see a lot of different things in government.

We need to think about what Silicon Valley can contribute to the country - not just that somehow government bureaucrats should listen to our way.

Look at the structure of the Gates Foundation and this idea that, rather than trying to solve these huge global problems through institutions with some kind of democracy and transparency baked into them, we're just going to outsource it to benevolent billionaires.

The question for America is pretty simple: either we want a bunch of bureaucrats in Washington telling us what we can't do, or we empower American innovators to unlock things that we can do.

The conservative idea is not that government has no role. You might have argued that in the thirties when conservatives opposed the New Deal.

We don't live with the community of yesteryear. And we don't enjoy the public services Europeans do. So we turn to the market. Once we do, we find that service providers raise the standards of personal life, so that we come to feel we need them to live our 'best' personal lives.

History suggests that attempts to privatize Medicare by relying on private companies to offer Medicare benefits in rural America simply will not work.

Jim mentioned I was an ALEC member, and that's correct.

The federal government should encourage rather than micromanage market reform in all 50 states. Since health care is local, private-sector innovation in conjunction with state-level reform of the individual and small-group markets is a better approach.

Crowdsourcing aid is a cunning way to work around the do-nothing corridors of official Washington. But it also raises complicated questions about the nature of humanitarianism and what it means for a 'nation' to help.