I think that the root of almost all of the "controversial" subjects in America today boils down to just this: what is the role of government? If we were to all agree on this, everything else would become much easier to resolve. Unfortunately we can't seem to agree on this, and I don't know if we ever will.
The majority of the original European settlers in America came here to escape oppression. There were other reasons too, but this one reason is what caused us to claim independence from Great Britain. We wanted to be left to ourselves to determine our own fortunes and destiny. The government that was subsequently formed was carefully thought out and passionately debated. At its core were the concepts of individual freedom, active local governments (states), and a system of checks and balances at the national level to prevent tyranny. Government was to be very limited, in order to prevent the recurrence of oppression.
Each state had its own laws and jurisdiction. Federal laws were aimed at getting the states to cooperate in the context of one country. For example, people should be allowed to travel from one state to another without being taxed, etc. The system of state governments is still very strong. Each state administers its own laws regarding driver's licenses, drinking age, decency, etc.
Over time, the federal government has grown much stronger, and has overtaken responsibilities previously belonging to the states. It started out as a way of standardizing things such as transportation systems. It has now become much more. In some ways this is not a bad thing in my opinion. I like standards in areas such as transportation, money, measures, and even food labels and prescription drugs. On the other hand, I like local government and the concept of being closer to the decision process for local issues. The balance between these seems to be continually tipping more towards the federal level. My biggest objection to this is that a smaller group of insane and vocal idiots can mess everything up for the whole country.
Another role that has been taken on more and more by the government is that of social care-giver. This was never an original role of the U.S. government. To care for one person requires taking funds from (taxing) another. Originally, it was the role of religious and charitable organizations, and other good people to care for the poor, the sick, or the needy. Just as the government stays out of business, it was also supposed to stay out of the business of playing Robin-Hood.
Where we are getting into trouble is that people believe the government is supposed to play the role of social safety net. This is probably the single largest point of contention between conservatives and liberals. Exactly what is the government supposed to be responsible for? My good health? Food on my plate? Promotion and preservation of the arts? Even if I strongly object to what someone calls "art”? It is a slippery slope that we have started down, and I don’t see where it is going to end.
It started out with welfare and social security. It has also expanded into Medicare. Several attempts have been made at instilling a national health care program. It's probably inevitable that some day that will become a reality. In order to pay for all of these programs, our taxes are increased. Not only that, but the way taxes are levied penalizes those who work harder and thus are more successful. Instead of everyone paying a flat percentage, the tax system is graduated, in order to force the "rich" to pay "their fair share".
This same thing has been done in other countries to an even greater extent than here. It is interesting to see what has happened in those countries. Anyone with any ambition leaves the country to seek their fortune elsewhere. As a result, the country is left with mostly poor, elderly or un-ambitious people. Not enough people are left to be taxed, so the services given to them are far below their expectations. A friend from Sweden described to me how this is happening there.
My main problems with government getting involved in social programs are these:
- Any time large amounts of funds or power are involved, corruption is almost certainly inevitable. History is rife with examples, even in our own country.
- Each program, in order to justify their existence, clamors for more and more money. Even when a program proves to be a failure, the blame is never placed on the program itself or its administrators. It is placed on the lack of adequate funds.
- Programs are invented just to be able to participate in the ensuing money free-for-all. Congress becomes interested in finding ways to get the money spend in their districts, rather than concentrating on the good of all.
- Several social programs or benefits contradict moral beliefs of many of the citizens. Why should my tax dollars fund abortions of convenience? What about sex education programs that promote the use of condoms over other applications of even more common sense? And what’s next? Federally funded euthanasia? Some people would say “why not?”
I could go on, but these are the main points. Like I already mentioned, it is a very slippery slope.
Mind you, I very much believe the hungry should be fed and that the sick or poor should be helped. It is just that I am extremely wary of the government taking on that role. I don’t trust it. Just as the original founding fathers of our country did not trust big government, neither do I. Why cannot I choose from several independent charitable bodies to identify and help people in need? Why cannot people be asked to work in whatever ways they are able, if they are in need? Why must I finance slum girls who have babies on purpose just to get an increase in their welfare checks, so that it can be spent on drugs?
Government should help create an environment in which commerce can be conducted freely and safely. But should it be responsible for creating commerce? Why should the president take credit for “creating jobs”, or be blamed for failure to do so? A famous saying today regarding the president is “it’s the economy, stupid”. But why? The way the government messes up the economy is by spending money it does not have. It does this to appease the wishes of welfare-minded bleeding-heart spendthrifts who want a piece of the take.
There are some areas where the role of government isn’t clear. Gun control is one of those. To be honest I don’t know what the stance or overall policy and philosophy should be regarding the owning of guns or other weapons. Valid arguments can be made on both sides of the issue. Drugs, gambling, and other vices are also areas where the role of government is less clear.
I have not exhausted this subject – in fact I have barely scratched the surface. I may have already wearied you with the length of this rant so far. I’ll save more for later.
Let me close with this observation. It is the tendency of government to become larger and larger. We must be vigilant and wise, to keep this from happening. In many areas it is too late. Now we need to try to beat it back. This is very difficult, especially when people have not kept themselves informed, or have become complacent. The public has become susceptible to the media and the bleeding-hearts, and without thinking of the implications it has allowed things to get out of control. In areas where government has a strong-hold on social areas, we can at least fight to keep out corruption and abuse. Again, this is a difficult battle.
America has become great because of its degree of freedom from oppression. That is the reason our forefathers came here. But oppression is returning, in the form of unreasonable controls and taxes. It’s not that bad yet, but it’s not good either. At what point will the oppression be too much, causing either mass flight or rebellion?
It would sure be nice if we could agree on the roles and limits of government. Once we did, it would give us a much less complicated basis for moving forward.