Privatizing fire protection http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/06/30/privatizing_fire_protection“>

This article is not as fascinating as the reader’s comments. Of course, the author of the article isn’t reporting as much as editorializing. Privatization of fire service seems to really strike a sensitive spot with people. Private fire companies have been around, in America, since Ben Franklin organized the first fire insurance company. The firemen saved only the property insured by his insurance company. Eventually, organized volunteer fire companies formed along side of the private companies. As cities grew, it became necessary to have a full time paid staff of firemen to meet the cities need for immediate suppression of fires.

Once again, insurance companies are protecting their investments. Mostly, however, the insurance companies are using private fire services as an incentive to capture high net worth policy prospects, and then to keep them as clients. Its more of a marketing scheme than an actual asset protection function. There simply aren’t enough of the fire units to go around, and often the fire units aren’t allowed in to areas during the peak of a wildfire. The public fire agencies are deathly afraid of private fire companies supplanting them, so try to limit the effectiveness of the private firefighters. They would rather let homes burn than let private firefighters, paid for by private individuals or insurance companies, stop homes from burning down.

What is odd to me, though, is how vehemently some people are against another person paying for a service of their own choosing and cost. No one seems to mind private plumbers, or private auto repair shops. Generally speaking, if a person can afford to pay more for a service, or item, there’s not much ballyhooing. If a wealthy person lives in a different community, in a nicer home, with gardeners and maids, its very accepted. But let them pay for private firefighting, and the social structure seems capable of unraveling.

As for the authors’ conclusion that private firefighters would be less capable, or more corrupt, I can speak from experience that there’s no more likelihood of incompetence or corruption than in the public sector. Firefighters are people too, so individual character is more the controlling factor, rather than whether the person is paid by tax dollars or private funds. In fact, a private firefighter can be fired quite easily, not so with a public sector firefighter protected by a union and a civil service commission. So as competency goes, there’s probably more incentive to do better as a private firefighter than a protected civil servant.

After reading the article, please be sure to read the comments afterward. Let me know what you think.