Government I: Big Government

This is the first in a series of essays on government. Let’s begin with a few disclosures.

First, to state the obvious, everyone has their own opinions about politics and government, as it should be. These essays are my opinions, based on my own research, understanding, logic, perspective, and outlook on life. The conclusions I have reached seem valid to me, but they are certainly not definitive. I will continue to explore and learn, and my opinions will no doubt continue to modify themselves as I gain more understanding. Whatever your current viewpoint, I believe that these issues are so important that it is incumbent on each of us to search for the best resolutions. Perhaps these essays will help some folks in their quest for answers. Then again ...

My politics are definitely libertarian. That means I believe in free-market economics and small government. I do not believe in an unrestrained free market. We need a small government, by which I mean that government should only undertake those functions that are impractical for individuals or the private sector. For example, government should definitely: interact with foreign governments, protect us from enemies outside and criminals inside our borders, establish a legal system, establish a monetary system, arbitrate disputes between states, construct and maintain some public works, and provide some public services like parks and museums. There are certainly many other functions the government does and should do, but all of them should be undertaken with great care and closely monitored under the assumption that they will have unintended bad consequences. Additionally, I believe that all but the most critical laws and regulations should have a “sunset clause”, meaning that they automatically expire after a certain time unless they are specifically reinstated. This is very difficult to implement because most laws and regulations create bureaucracies which, once established, become entrenched. I believe that government should never protect us from ourselves, meaning that all drug laws and restrictions on marriage should be abolished (those usually please my liberal friends). Bottom line: I believe that much, if not most, of our current federal government should be abolished. I understand that some government is necessary and desirable. I just believe we currently have too much. Our government is simply too big.

I also believe that the traditional left-right and liberal-conservative scales are poor representations of political leaning. Rather than ask if their politics are to the right or left, conservative or liberal, I prefer to ask people how much faith they place in their government, and which functions they think should be relegated to the government? In other words, how do they feel about big government?

Those who prefer big government tend to believe that: government is usually the best solution to public problems; higher echelons of government are more trustworthy than lower (federal better than State better than local); central government planning and control works better than free market forces; and the government’s job is to care for the populace. Folks who believe this way often also believe in redistribution of wealth in order to achieve equality of outcome as opposed to the equality of opportunity envisioned in our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution. Equality of outcome means that everyone is entitled to the same privileges and standard of living, whereas equality of opportunity means that everyone has an equal right to earn more privileges and a higher standard of living.

In my experience, most of the people favoring big government are well-intentioned and honestly believe that the population at large is best served by a large and strong central government whose prime function it is to take care of us. At first glance, this seems like a good idea, even a noble one, but the benefits of big government come at a very high cost: loss of individual freedom and even dignity, being controlled if not subjugated by those who would help us, and a slippery slope toward totalitarianism. This is not to say that advocates of big government do not care about freedom or dignity, or prefer subjugation or totalitarianism. To the contrary, most of my friends who prefer big government do believe in personal freedom and democracy. They simply believe that big government can do the job better than individuals or the private sector, and that government can be controlled to avoid the pitfalls. I disagree.

In the words of Gerald Ford (often mis-attributed to Thomas Jefferson), “Any government big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take from you all you have”. Enough said.

Another problem with big government is its reliance on the benevolence of the ruling party and its leaders. A benevolent strong central government is only attractive while those in charge remain benevolent. But, big government’s power accrues to whomever is in charge, whether benevolent or not, and malevolent parties are especially adept at using lies, deception or other nefarious methods to achieve their goals. The downside is huge. As soon as a malevolent leader assumes control, the course leads directly to totalitarianism and it can rarely be reversed. The only really safe course is to keep a tight rein on government – limit its power to those few activities that cannot practically be conducted by individuals or private enterprise.

All governments are drawn inexorably toward growth. Government is a hungry beast whose appetite can only be satiated by power, and its advocates will capitalize on every opportunity to expand its power. Fortunately, our founders understood the dangers of big government. They carefully crafted our founding documents to control our government and prevent it from growing into a new form of monarchy. The American Constitution limits the powers of our government and instead places the power in the hands of “we the people”. Furthermore, through our system of “checks and balances”, our Constitution attempts to preclude the concentration of power in any one branch – a system that works well, except, of course, when one party controls all three branches. Our Constitution also ensures that government cannot grow without our consent, thus making it very difficult for big government or anyone else to overtly usurp our power. But little did the founders know that the greatest threat would come not from usurpation, but from gradual political evolution. Government grows by small, seemingly inconsequential, steps. At each election, politicians offer a few more individual benefits and corporate favors in exchange for votes and support, but each benefit and favor increases the government’s size, budget, and power. This is seduction, not rape – stealth tactics, not a frontal assault - but it nonetheless poses a potentially fatal threat to freedom. Only we, the people, can counter this threat. We must be ever-vigilant against being seduced by our own government into voluntarily relinquishing the power and control that are constitutionally vested in us.

One of the most successful tactics employed by big government advocates is “rescue and reform”. Beware of statements like: “Only government can save us.” “Only government can protect us from the evil forces that threaten to imprison us.” “Only government stands between us and greedy ‘big business’, and its cohorts in the right wing media, conservative Christianity, and the ‘military-industrial complex’”. “Only government can reform the present system and rescue us from the ‘failed policies’ of capitalism and the free market.” Then comes the great reform: in order to “protect us”, government must be given the power to reform our laws, and our behavior – to change or even discard the core values that have made America great. The reformer professes that we are helpless on our own, but the government is here to save us. In such malarkey lies the greatest threat to our freedom. Beware the reformer.

I should note that another big attraction to big government is that it is so easy to turn it all over to someone else. If the government will do everything, take care of us and everyone else, why not let it? What is the danger in big government?

It is not so much a danger as a dangerous progression. In a democracy, the citizenry must agree to any governmental growth. Therefore, if limited government is to evolve into big government, the government must gain the support of a majority of its citizens. In order to secure that majority, big government politicians promise increasing levels of pay, benefits, free services, and entitlements. The big government politicians also gain the support of unions and certain industries by promising favorable treatment, e.g., exemptions from certain restrictive regulations, tax loopholes, government support or contracts, etc. Using such tactics, the government gradually continues to grow in size and power. At some point, the democracy morphs into “democratic socialism” (some suggest that the USA now functions as a socialist democracy). Eventually, so many people become dependent on the government, and the government has assumed so much control, that the citizenry have effectively lost their control over government. They no longer have much say over how much they are governed. As an increasing percentage of the population becomes dependent on the government, the number of people whose productivity and earnings actually pay for all this dependence decreases. Eventually, the nation can no longer sustain itself and its economy and government collapse. This is what happened in Soviet Russia and is close to happening in Greece and other European countries today.

The big government saga continues in the other essays in this series.