Connect with us

Everything

My biggest problem with government is not SIZE, but SCOPE

Published

on

What size are you?

It’s hard to answer that question if you’re not sure exactly what I’m referring to. I could be talking about height, weight, shoes, jeans, dresses, collars, rings, underwear, or cowboy hats. Context matters, and the word “size” is not one-size-fits-all.

With that in mind, what is the size of the government? I think we can all agree that the government is too big, but we need to specify what we mean by that — simply that the government has too much power in general, or that it has power over too many things? Both are troublesome, but I tend to place priority on the latter. So while many people complain that the government is too tall — that wherever it has jurisdiction it seizes excessive control, which I agree with — my primary health concern is that the government is too fat. This is why I adore the term “bloated government.” It imagines one that is too wide, spread too far over too many areas.

Issues of government height call for analysis, argumentation, and compromise. Defense, for instance, is a legitimate function of the federal government. But the appropriate amount of military spending, which wars to enter and when, and how many soldiers to enlist are all circumstantial. Standards of engagement must be decided case by case, and peacetime spending will certainly decrease, but by how much? There is no universal answer, so in that area, government height is subject to rational debate and vigilant scrutiny.

We should, however, know how to settle with relative ease whether the government should be involved in a particular field at all — this is government width. We babble ourselves breathless about cutting taxes and government spending, but not all revenue is created equal.

Why would we even consider slashing defense spending when the federal government has already proposed Social Security expenditures topping $1 trillion for fiscal year 2018, nearly one third of the government’s total estimated revenue of $3.654 trillion? Medicare and Medicaid account for an additional $986 billion of the FY2018 budget, meaning that these three welfare programs alone make up over 54% of projected spending. Before we can make the federal government any shorter, we have to trim the fat.

So when we say we need to cut spending, that doesn’t mean “reduce spending in all those areas in which we’re currently spending.” It means “cut out entirely those areas in which the federal government has no business spending.” And if we can cut out almost $2 trillion on just those three unconstitutional social programs, imagine what that will do for your tax rate.

Suppressing bloated government (federal or state) and securing power to those to whom it rightfully belongs is the essence of federalism. Reserving certain powers to the states doesn’t magically grant states the authority to violate our unalienable rights, as I’ve discussed previously, but matters of health, education, and welfare (among others) cannot be handled at a federal level for a bevy of reasons: 1) The federal government stinks at it. 2) We must respect the supremacy of the Constitution and the rule of law. 3) Local authority is much easier to restrain.

This is the beauty and genius of our separate but equal system of government: the judicial, legislative, and executive branches keep each other in check both federally and locally; federal and state governments maintain balance between themselves; and the people place checks on all of the above. Somehow we always forget about the second — there must be balance between federal and state powers. Historically, when one has been so powerful that the other could not bridle it, we’ve ended up with the Civil War, Japanese internment camps, and a crippling welfare state. Extremism on both sides is detrimental to the foundation of our republic.

The United States of America has endured progressive politics for over 100 years from both Republicans like Teddy Roosevelt and Herbert Hoover, as well as Democrats like Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Lyndon B. Johnson. Party tribalism is not and has never been the answer. Devotion to principles — particularly those on which this country was built — are the only hope we have of recovery.

Richie Angel is a Co-Editor in Chief of The New Guards, Co-Host of The New Guards Podcast, lifelong fan of the Anaheim Ducks, and proud Hufflepuff. He graduated Magna Cum Laude in English from Brigham Young University in 2017. One day later, his wife gave birth to a beautiful daughter. Richie is a constitutional conservative and doesn't see any compassion in violating other people's rights.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Education

Whoopi is right about the behavior of UCLA Basketball players in China

Published

on

Whoopi Goldberg

I’m not a big fan of Whoopi Goldberg, okay but I have to tell you that I agree with her regarding the following statement.  This is in regards to a couple of UCLA basketball players who thought they could take something from a store in China and not pay for it.

You embarrassed your families, you embarrassed the country, and you embarrassed the president. Now I’m not a big fan of the president, but the fact that he had to call and get your asses out of there is not anything to be proud of or think is cool.  If this isn’t the stupidest thing a young person has done, particularly if you’re over six-feet tall, and black… is this just the ridiculous stupidity of youth?

Let me add one more thing. You’re an embarrassment to UCLA itself, and their athletic department as well.  Now I am not a big fan of those who run academia, but if these jerks are given the right punishment, I shall give the university credit and praise for doing it.  All right UCLA, the ball is in your court.  Do something right for once.

Further Reading

Whoopi Goldberg to ‘Stupid’ UCLA Players: You’re Fortunate Trump Could ‘Get Your A**es Out’ of China

http://freebeacon.com/issues/whoopi-goldberg-ucla-players-fortunate-trump-get-out-china/“Now, you’re in China—you’re this big!” she said, reaching high into the air to indicate the players’ height. “It’s not like you’re gonna blend, you’re not going to blend in, run out.”

Goldberg said their families and mentors had no doubt told them numerous times not to do things like this, and she said the foolishness of youth is the only explanation for something so dumb.

President Trump says ‘You’re welcome’ after UCLA Bruins players thank him for help with China incident

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/21432885/president-trump-says-welcome-ucla-bruins-players-thank-help-china-incidentUCLA athletic director Dan Guerrero said freshmen LiAngelo Ball, Cody Riley and Jalen Hill stole from three stores, were arrested and surrendered their passports. Trump, who was already on an Asia trip, spoke to President Xi Jinping of China about the incident, and the players were allowed to return to the United States on Tuesday.

On Wednesday, all three read prepared statements at a news conference in which it was revealed that they have been suspended from the team indefinitely. They thanked the Chinese government and police for how they were treated and United States officials for helping secure their release.

Continue Reading

Entertainment and Sports

Jerry Jones to Roger Goodell: “I’m gonna come after you with everything I have”

Published

on

Jerry Jones to Roger Goodell Im gonna come after you with everything I have

The NFL has problems, and I’m not talking about their lack of star power at the quarterback position. From dwindling attendance to the public relations nightmare of players kneeling, the NFL under Commissioner Roger Goodell has been in a state of a decline for a while.

Jerry Jones agrees. The Dallas Cowboy’s owner had some harsh words for the commissioner.

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell in bitter battle few saw coming led by Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones

http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/21441056/nfl-commissioner-roger-goodell-bitter-battle-saw-coming-led-dallas-cowboys-owner-jerry-jones“I’m gonna come after you with everything I have,” Jones said. Then he mentioned Deflategate. “If you think Bob Kraft came after you hard, Bob Kraft is a p—y compared to what I’m going to do.”

Nobody knows what Jones is going to do. But at the age of 58, Goodell is fighting to keep his job. In public, he looks fresh and energetic, and he is more resolute than ever to leave with a legacy of having come close to fixing football’s long-standing issues. Up close, though, his face has changed due to relentless stress; it is now sallow and lined and tired. Roger Goodell is in a battle few saw coming, with the league’s membership teetering on an all-out, unprecedented civil war.

Continue Reading

Federalists

The Obamacare Debacle: Why we need a second political party

Published

on

By

Sometimes you simply hope that your predictions will be wrong and that events will miraculously turn out differently; unfortunately, this is not one of those times. Most people with a modicum of common sense anticipated that the Republicans would now take the blame for the troubles of Obamacare, and that has come to pass.  The aphorism ‘You broke it, you bought it’ comes to mind, and while somewhat unfair to the situation, perception is reality in the world of politics.

Tear it down and start over.

While not endeavoring to reign blows upon a deceased equine, this is why the Republican party needed to keep its promise on Obamacare. It’s also the reason why it’s time to sweep away the old and begin anew with a brand new second major political party. That phrase was deliberately used because it has become quite evident that the Republican and Democratic parties have started to merge in far too many ways.

The Obamacare debacle is a prime illustration of this unfortunate merging. O’Sullivan’s First Law explains this to a fair degree since the denizens of a certain party will – over time – want to keep the bureaucratic levers of power with the false idea that they can have it run more efficiently. Besides the simple expedient of term limits, a new party could start anew with a mandate to avoid this political trap.

An illustration from the world of engineering seems more than appropriate in this instance. There are times when a machine or structure has become so riddled with worn out or failed components that it is far better to simply scrap or tear it down and build something from scratch. The aphorism is to start with a clean sheet of paper such that the old assumptions and constructs are swept away in favor of something entirely new and innovative. “We’ve always done it this way” is replaced with questioning skepticism with regard to what works, and what doesn’t.

Existing components that have proven to be of service can be utilized in the new construct but only if they meet certain criteria, not simply because they are carried along with everything else of the old. By the same token, members of the old party can become a vital part of the new but only if they are up to the task.

The final word on the Republican party.

It is more than likely that the people responsible for that bureaucratic mess will use it to good political advantage against those who opposed it in the first place. We should be getting rid of governmental interference in the free market, but instead will see a complete control with national socialist healthcare [i.e., the ‘single payer’ deception].

There is no other choice than to limit the damage now with a new party that will stay true to conservative principles. The results of the alternative are too horrible to contemplate.

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.