Recently, I saw an article written by a former White House drone Robert Reich. His points were the usual dribble. But I thought it might be fun to reply.
In his opening shot, he says “conservative Republicans” have shut down Congress.
Really? Is Congress shut down? It seems to be meeting and continuing its attempts to garner more power for itself. Obamacare, disarming the people, groping the people, spying on the people, taxing the people into poverty, using the IRS as a control mechanism to keep the people in line – the list goes on.
Do you see a shut down? I sure don’t. Frankly, a shutdown would be a nice change. Imagine that: no government regulations handed down from on high. The idea of a shutdown might cause some Americans to cringe in horror, but not so for some of us. The tide would still come in, the earth would still spin, and without Congress pulling, the clouds would still roll by. We would keep right on breathing - maybe more easily!
But I must get back on topic here and address more silliness I see in the scribbling before me.
In his article, he laments that states are passing more and more legislation locally. That is by design. The states are sovereign, and should indeed be producing laws and regulations according to their own citizens’ needs and desires. If the citizens of Vermont want local school boards to decide on curriculum for their children, that is their business. If the citizens of Utah elect representatives to delete any need for conceal carry permits, that is their business. If the citizens of Arizona want to defend the international border they have by rounding up law-breaking aliens and sending them back to the country they came from, it isn’t the business of the busybodies in DC.
Mr. “big government is good” seems to have a problem with the idea that the states created the federal government. They are OUR servant. The states agreed to give only very limited powers to the federal government, and to abide by a broad set of principles. They did not agree to acquiesce to the demands of a far distant and greedy central government.
States moving further right or left
The relative positions of the states, according to some right or left classification, is irrelevant. The union is formed by sovereign states that agreed to work together in a broad coalition of like-minded people.
I also notice Reich uses the popular technique of separating people by hate and fear. Homosexuals won’t be able to get married in some states. Well, if that is what the citizens of that state want, it is their business. And other states will certainly welcome gay marriage. Abortion has been restricted in some states. If that is what the citizens of that state want, it is their business. And other states will certainly feature less restrictive abortion policy. People will be allowed to protect themselves with their own weapons. This one is a sure revealer; the writer just doesn’t like that darned Bill of (natural) Rights.
Problems with Freedom?
Then there is the accusation that free decisions by free people are somehow a “race to the bottom” Really? That certainly goes against our experiences. In truth, freedom raises all possibilities and creates a vitality of people and economy. By contrast, central government rule has been shown to not work. We don’t even need to look back at the last centuries to see that. In Europe today, the deterioration of each nation since accepting the “we are all the same” model of government is obvious. How many are in bankruptcy now?
And here he trots out the old fear mongering, a favorite of the big government crowd – somehow, the states will repress minority rights. I will only briefly remind the author of the facts. It is the states that took an independent view and nullified the federal “laws” entitled the Fugitive Slave Acts. (The federal acts of 1793 and 1850 providing for the return between states of escaped black slaves.) If all the states had sheepishly submitted to these unlawful acts, there might never have been an Underground Railroad, helping escaped slaves into the free states and to a new life. The author also concerns himself with how state spillover might be a problem. It appears spillover is sometimes a good thing. Slavery, as federally sanctioned activity, doesn’t exist in this country anymore.
I wonder in what collectivist mind the idea that government is wonderful and bigger government is better was formed. It is not a matter of hating government. It is the idea of getting the federal government back inside of its constitutional limits. The framer’s never intended that the federal government would control individuals, not directly nor indirectly. I find it interesting that these same people, who think big government is the answer, hate big industry. But that is a topic for another day.
Our Framer’s thought gridlock was a way of keeping the feds from creating a monstrous body of laws. Can’t we all just get along? No! Not when a faction (or even a majority) wants to remove natural rights and create dependence upon the federal government, thereby nullifying the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
The Framers remarks on the subject
“Another advantage accruing from this ingredient (gridlock) in the constitution of the Senate is the additional impediment it must prove against improper acts of legislation. No law or resolution can now be passed without concurrence, first, of a majority of the people, and then of a majority of the States.
~Mr. Madison, Federalist #62
“In legislature, promptitude of decision is oftener an evil than a benefit. The differences of opinion, and the jarring of parties in that department of the government, though they may sometimes obstruct salutary plans, yet often promote deliberation and circumspection, and serve to check excesses in the majority.”
~Mr. Hamilton, Federalist #70
I think I’ll stick with these guys’ opinions. Thank you! I say lets have more gridlock, or even a shutdown. It might be really good for We the People!