Balanced Government

We’ve all heard stories about the government picking winners and losers. It’s just that when a story is as blatant as the one involving Forest Laboratories, Inc., we have serious questions to ask ourselves, not the least of which is this: do we live in America any more?

The Wall Street Journal ran a story entitled “U.S. Effort to Remove Drug CEO Jolts Firms” today, describing the conflict between the government and a drug manufacturer. As the Journal reports:

The Department of Health and Human Services this month notified Howard Solomon of Forest Laboratories Inc. that it intends to exclude him from doing business with the federal government. This, in turn, could prevent Forest from selling its drugs to Medicare, Medicaid and the Veterans Administration. If the government implements its ban, Forest would have to dump Mr. Solomon, now 83 years old, in order to protect its corporate revenue. No drug company, large or small, can afford to lose out on sales to the federal government, a major customer.

The background: in September 2010, the company made a plea deal to pay fines related to marketing misconduct of two of its anti-depressant drugs. Mr. Solomon, the CEO, was never accused by the government of misconduct, and the company’s fines were not insubstantial ($313 million in penalties). The Department of HHS initiated intent to ban action against Mr. Solomon and Forest after reaching a settlement with the company.

Do these actions fall under the umbrella of the just powers of government? Nowhere in the article does the government make a definitive statement as to why the intent-to-ban action has been initiated. Cynicism may impute any number of motives for such behavior; but with imperfect information it is prudent to assume the best rationale and intentions. Nevertheless, is this the government that our Founders pledged their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor for? A government that may at its discretion pick winners and losers? One that may at its discretion, choose the CEO of a private company? Let’s review the pertinent part of the Declaration, and ask ourselves: do we still believe this?

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Are our rights secured? Do we consent to this government? Has the government become destructive of our rights? Can it be altered?

We’re at a critical point in time in the history of our Republic, and the answers to these questions are troubling. Perhaps we still have our liberty, and every supposed infringement is merely media-induced hysteria. I’ll grant the reader that often, the bark is worse than the bite. We are right to ask, however: if the federal government may force a company to fire its CEO and hire a new CEO, where does the power of the federal government end?