A Philosophical Question on Government

I was thinking about what questions I might ask a candidate if I were given a chance at a town hall meeting, press conference, or public debate, and what would be most important for me to understand in casting my ballot.  There are two questions I don’t think I’ve ever heard the press ask, although I tend to zone out and ignore most televised debates because of their Kabuki like presentation, and I am not sure most of the politicians from either party would answer simply, for in simple answers we would see their agenda too clearly.

The first question would be “What is the role of government?” 

In today's world of political and racial correctness this seems to be a most important question.  Is it the governments job to shape society, or is society and its standards only a medium in which government exists?  Unlike the question of which came first, the chicken or the egg? We know society preexists government, but the two are inextricably intertwined as both are products of the humans involved. 

At our origin, the founders had, just ten years earlier, led a rebellion against a distant authoritarian government.  They were concerned with the rights and individual freedoms of the society, as it existed in the late 18^th century.  They built a central government with clear limits to its power through the system of checks and balances, and allowances for the rights of the several states to operate independently.

The preamble of the U.S. Constitution lays out four roles for government, they are “establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, [and] promote the general Welfare…” Each of these roles come directly from the shared experiences of the political leadership of that society.  Justice was first – for without faith in the equality of justice by the majority of society neither the society nor the government can long exist.  With the Confederation of States the framers learned that only a central power with sufficient strength to settle the inevitable disputes between states, or rebellious factions can ensure society can flourish.  Next, understanding the threats from external powers the need for some kind of standing Army and Navy was a cost best born by the central government and not the individual states.  Finally, they believed government should not interfere with the individual’s rights to health, happiness, and prosperity.

Over the years we have moved from the original vision of the signers to something much more powerful than what our founders could have ever imagined.  It was inevitable this would occur since the strong men of the day sought to expand their authority just as strong men and women of today do.  This leads to the natural question, is the evolution of centralized power a good or bad thing for the health of our society?

The second question I would ask is, how long do you intend to “serve” in office?

When our government began, the individuals elected to office did so with the understanding this was a part-time job and after a couple of terms they would return to private life.  It didn’t take long for those same politicians see they had found the goose that laid a golden egg.  This led to expanding their employment into full time roles and life-long careers where they were able to significantly improve the socio-economic outlook.  Along the way the created a civil service to support their law-making, creating a bureaucratic class that also benefits from the expansion of government.  While it is true there has been expansion and contraction of our government there are two facts that are inescapable.  A contracting government never returns to the same size it was before it was expanded in the first place, and since WW II there has been only a significant expansion in the size and scope of the central government.

Since we appear to have reached a point in our history where we seem unwilling to establish term limits for representatives and senators through the amendment process, our only avenue for limiting government growth is to hold ourselves accountable and not vote f0r incumbents after a couple of terms.  Unfortunately, this works against our self-interest so that is not a likely course of action either.  

 It looks to me as if the expansion of government is likely to continue until such time as it topples from its own weight.