"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed----." Declaration of Independence
As a conservative who regards the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution as the bedrock of our individual freedoms and sovereignty, I am troubled by the path that we have been on and which we elected to stay on this past election.
We have discussed in past posts the country's problems:
*A stalled economy.
*Out of control public expenditures.
*An unsustainable federal debt.
*A political and cultural climate that fosters dependence and seeks security at the expense of liberty.
*A federal government that is too big, intrusive and bureaucratic with no clear lines of responsibility.
*The lack of political will and the courage to address and solve our problems.
*Politicians who speak of high ideals and big things but act small.
*The undue influence of lobbyists in the legislative and regulatory process and their corrupting influence on our election campaigns.
*The lack of respect and tolerance for each other's opinions and insensitivity in our public discourse.
*An emphasis on what is expedient, not what is morally right or in keeping with our nation's ideals and constitutional imperatives.
I strongly believe that our country would have been better served had we been truer to the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. In the main, those principles envision a federal government of enumerated and limited power granted to it by the sovereign will of the people--that such powers granted were to be divided and balanced among the three branches--and that powers not granted "are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." (10th Amendment).
In the first ten amendments of the Constitution (the Bill of Rights), certain freedoms are specifically protected from federal jurisdiction and in subsequent amendments individual liberty and rights are guaranteed to all of the nation's citizens.
In its size and scope, the federal government as it now exists is far beyond its constitutional mandate of limited and specific powers. For example, the federal government currently regulates much of how we live our daily lives from the food we eat, to the education of our children, to the toys they play with, to the products we buy, to the health care we use and much more. In addition, the government has the power to access all manner of personal information through the tax system, the internet and its ability to intercept private communications.
One could argue that these government functions are required for our safety, for security purposes. But consider what we have lost: diminished personal freedom, individual sovereignty, responsibility and the incentives that spark individual initiative. With these values comes risks but if we are to be free, we should be willing to accept some uncertainty, some risks. If we do otherwise, we are denying those essential elements that made our country exceptional: "--that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
It is true that our nation historically has faced and conquered numerous crises. I believe that we still can if we are resolute and true to our principles. But questions remain.
Will we follow the example of generations past who forthrightly faced their problems? Or are we to the point that we can not or will not? Are we capable of making the changes required to get our federal government under control? To restore to the States and to the people those powers that were meant to be retained by them? Only time will tell.
As a conservative who regards the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution as the bedrock of our individual freedoms and sovereignty, I am troubled by the path that we have been on and which we elected to stay on this past election.
We have discussed in past posts the country's problems:
*A stalled economy.
*Out of control public expenditures.
*An unsustainable federal debt.
*A political and cultural climate that fosters dependence and seeks security at the expense of liberty.
*A federal government that is too big, intrusive and bureaucratic with no clear lines of responsibility.
*The lack of political will and the courage to address and solve our problems.
*Politicians who speak of high ideals and big things but act small.
*The undue influence of lobbyists in the legislative and regulatory process and their corrupting influence on our election campaigns.
*The lack of respect and tolerance for each other's opinions and insensitivity in our public discourse.
*An emphasis on what is expedient, not what is morally right or in keeping with our nation's ideals and constitutional imperatives.
I strongly believe that our country would have been better served had we been truer to the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. In the main, those principles envision a federal government of enumerated and limited power granted to it by the sovereign will of the people--that such powers granted were to be divided and balanced among the three branches--and that powers not granted "are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." (10th Amendment).
In the first ten amendments of the Constitution (the Bill of Rights), certain freedoms are specifically protected from federal jurisdiction and in subsequent amendments individual liberty and rights are guaranteed to all of the nation's citizens.
In its size and scope, the federal government as it now exists is far beyond its constitutional mandate of limited and specific powers. For example, the federal government currently regulates much of how we live our daily lives from the food we eat, to the education of our children, to the toys they play with, to the products we buy, to the health care we use and much more. In addition, the government has the power to access all manner of personal information through the tax system, the internet and its ability to intercept private communications.
One could argue that these government functions are required for our safety, for security purposes. But consider what we have lost: diminished personal freedom, individual sovereignty, responsibility and the incentives that spark individual initiative. With these values comes risks but if we are to be free, we should be willing to accept some uncertainty, some risks. If we do otherwise, we are denying those essential elements that made our country exceptional: "--that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
It is true that our nation historically has faced and conquered numerous crises. I believe that we still can if we are resolute and true to our principles. But questions remain.
Will we follow the example of generations past who forthrightly faced their problems? Or are we to the point that we can not or will not? Are we capable of making the changes required to get our federal government under control? To restore to the States and to the people those powers that were meant to be retained by them? Only time will tell.
So well put clearly enunciating how grave the answer of this generation must be for our future and that of our children.
ReplyDeleteCourage is calling...will we respond?
I wonder what it would take for the citizens of this nation to rise up in a way that would force the government to take notice. I don't see a scenario where legislators vote to give themselves less power. I think that if you asked people (independent of political affiliation) if they wanted a smaller or bigger government role in our lives, they would say smaller.
ReplyDeleteI certainly think there are a number of things that could be handled on a state level (education for one). Some things have advantages when more people/states are involved (health care in my opinion).
The world has gotten so complicated and it's population has increased in such a way that a series of laws designed to 'fix' a problem here and a problem there have resulted in layers upon layers of legislation that can make lives difficult for everyone.
A simplified, just system sounds ideal, but getting back to that point is going to require a reset that can only brought on in a time of extreme turmoil. Hopefully that massive change will be not be even further towards a '1984'-style vision of the world.
We will see what the next 4 years bring. From what I can see now, we are a long ways from demanding large scale change of the government.
Both Sandra and Ryan have made excellent observations which go to the core of our problems. Their comments lead us to ask: Where are we heading--toward a downward spiral or will we muster the collective judgement and moral courage to change direction?
ReplyDeleteChanges to our laws can be made legislatively by acts of Congress. But the best way to insure long lasting reform is by constitutional amendments. Congress has the power to propose amendments for the States to approve by a two thirds majority of both Houses. However, as Ryan correctly observes, legislators are not disposed to vote less power for themselves. There is another path.
The Constitution provides that two thirds of the State legislatures can call a Constitutional Convention in order to consider and propose amendments. The proposed amendments require the approval of three quarters of the States, the same as for those proposed by Congress, to become part of the Constitution.
The writers of the Constitution did not intend that it could be changed easily. Since the passage of the first ten amendments (the Bill of Rights) at the start of our nation's existence, there have been only sixteen approved amendments and we have never had a constitutional convention.
What is to be done? Will the American people accept a federal government that is growing increasingly more powerful? Or will government power become so abusive and intolerable that "extreme turmoil" will result pushing us further to "1984" as Ryan states. Under either scenario, we could very well have authoritarian government into the distant future.
There may be some cause for optimism. It is based on the hope that Americans can still recognize and cherish the values of freedom. That they will demand the changes required to protect that freedom. That they will rely on lawful and proper means to make those changes provided for in the Constitution and without which we will degenerate into chaos and obscurity.
Much of our future will be determined by the type of leaders we select. It behooves all of us to be part of the process. Will we choose leaders who inspire us to live by the principles and ideals at the foundation of our country? To uphold the right of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" endowed to all by our Creator?
Or are we to choose leaders who appeal to our baser instincts, of hate and fear, of envy and division?
The choice is ours to make--only time will tell how we respond.
I read the comments and wish to add some facts to consider. I have just read the President is using Twitter to promote his tax plan. On Twitter it's called: My2K.....meaning if the Bush tax cuts expire, the average middle-class "Joe" will have to pay $2,200 more in taxes and this will be the fault of republicans. Obama also plans on holding a rally in Philly to garner support for his plans for taxing the "rich". Who determines our tax structure, Congress or twitter and public rally's? The Constitution is clear, read Article One, section 8....So why isn't the President negotiating and leading Congress? The time for campaigning is over. The time for leading is NOW.
ReplyDeleteInteresting point: does anybody know what the President has proposed in spending cuts? Has the President ever stated how much revenue will be raised by tax increases on the "rich"? Certainly, if we are to believe the President "found" $700 Billion dollars worth of spending cuts in medicare, during these past four years he would also have found billions of other wasteful spending.....There is an interesting article on the Drudge Report today re: the effect of tax increases on the "rich" in Great Britain. The new tax increase lead to a huge reduction in revenue. Where did all those "nasty rich" people go? Norm hits the nail on the head when he talks about the type of leaders we elect. Obama must realize the election is over and he won....now is the time to govern and lead. Lord knows, with Reid and Pelosi there simply has to be somebody to lead these fools. Instead, Obama plays with twitter and shucks and jives and portrays himself as a "populist". Meanwhile, nothing gets accomplished. Obama doesn't "need" the Constitution. This document simply gets in the way of this populist President and an ever gullible and unknowing public. Can Obama get away with blaming Bush and republicans for another four years? As Norm says, only time will tell.