Smaller Government is Best for Everyone, Including Liberals

by walterm on March 20, 2017

So Donald Trump has proposed his budget, which has liberals apoplectic about the cuts to federal government agency and programs he is proposing. To this I would ask liberals, why are you so keen on a huge, expansive, federal government getting involved in virtually all aspects of American life? There are a number of things Trump wants to cut, such as the Department of Health and Human Services global health initiative, the National Endowment of the Arts, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. He’s also proposing to make cuts to the Agriculture, Labor, and State departments along with cabinet level folks in the EPA. What liberals seem to be most upset about, however, are cuts to K-12, family aid, and some funds for community development and affordable housing programs. Well, they shouldn’t be upset. Those programs that are administered at the local and state level should be paid for at the local and state level because these programs really are not the business of the federal government to begin with, and never should have been. If liberals want these programs, then they can very well fund these programs themselves at the local and state level.

We all know the federal government does not have a license to print money. All of its money comes from the taxpayer, and the federal government has our country in debt to the tune of $20 trillion and counting. So why would a liberal want to lift money out of taxpayers wallets and send it to Washington, D.C., only to have that money come back cents on the dollars with federal strings attached as to how they must spend it? Moreover, the federal government does indeed threaten to withhold funds to the states if they don’t do the federal government’s bidding. So why would anyone want to send money to the federal government that could stay in the state where it can be spent most efficiently and effectively, and closest to the point of need? To me it is madness that the states have become so dependent on the federal government, knowing that when that money leaves it is no longer theirs and they no longer control a vital resource that was once theirs.

Anyone who has read my blogs all of these years knows that I work from principles, and I believe those principles work for everyone, not just conservatives. A small federal government with limited powers as enshrined so clearly in the U.S. Constitution is best for the conservative and the liberal. Recall that when Barack Obama was president (and thankfully is no longer president), liberals couldn’t get enough of big government. The more federal government the better, as long as the federal government was giving them what they wanted. But now that Donald Trump is president, suddenly they don’t want much government except for the bloated agencies and programs they want to continue to grow. Well hopefully, they will not grow under Trump. And they shouldn’t have grown under Obama either because most federal government programs are not valid functions, and not things they can do effectively and competently anyway. These functions liberals want the federal government to continue to do should be done at the state and local level, and they should be advocating for the policies they care about regarding human welfare at the state and local level, not the federal government.

In my view, having a federal government that simply does its constitutional functions and stays out of local and state issues, except where they violate federal law, is the proper functioning of the federal government. If liberals would just think for one moment, they would see this would work very well for them since no matter who is in the presidency, it wouldn’t affect them on a day-to-day basis because the federal government was never designed to be a day-to-day concern unless we were in a moment of crisis. They could keep their money in their pockets where they could deploy it themselves for their own causes, or pay that money out in local or state taxes so their representatives may act for them. This way each state can chart its own destiny, and each state becomes a laboratory of democracy as U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis famously suggested in the early 1900s. It’s what we call federalism, which leaves day-to-day governance at the local and state levels. Liberal would be wise to gain wisdom and focus on their own states. Somehow, I think the great flaw of liberals is that they believe if they want something, it should be forced on the whole populous. Conservatives believe the exact opposite, that people should vote at the state or local level on what is best for them, and that the federal government should pretty much stay out of local and state matters so people can migrate to the communities or states that best meet their wants and needs. Is that so complicated?


Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: