Ron Paul and the Tenth Amendment

Criminyjicket has a real talent for sparking debate, most recently about Ron Paul’s note of August 22:

He doesn’t want a big federal government, he wants huge monolithic state governments, just like the constitution envisions. You wouldn’t be taxed less under a Ron Paul regime, you would merely be taxed by someone else…

Ron Paul doesn’t offer you a chance to lose the leash. He offers you the opportunity to have someone else hold it. That isn’t freedom…

He doesn’t mention that unconstitutional government has also granted us stability that there is no way the 50 states legislating themselves ever will. He merely wishes to change the problems we face. 50 powerful little pigs trying to get all the slop for themselves will create a nation that feeds on itself. At least under the current method we are feeding on others…

Respectfully, I disagree with CJ’s perspective. For me, the biggest issue is a responsive government and self-determination. Why do folks line up to go into federal government? That’s where the power, and the funds, are. It pains me to read my Congressman’s Web site, and see him trumpeting the fact that he’s bringing home $300,000 in federal appropriations to fund our local county’s mental health program.

Why did that money leave the state in the first place? Where did it come from? Assuming we should be funding it, shouldn’t we be funding it ourself, in a way that respects our local needs and priorities? If we weren’t sending 30% of our incomes to D.C., we’d have a lot more wealth to deal with things at the state and local level.

Even more importantly, our federal government makes fleecing the public through corporate and special interest lobbying much more cost effective. If corporations had to lobby for corporate welfare and protectionist policies on a state-by-state basis, they might actually be motivated to compete based upon creating value in the marketplace instead of legislating and regulating current and potential competitors out of business.

And then take a look at the quality of your state government. Why do many people fear an increased role for state government? Well, if you’re like me, you look at your state government and are underwhelmed by its intelligence, competence, and integrity. (North Carolina is a particularly good example of using state government as a stepping stone to incarceration. Crazy stuff.) State and local governments are widely perceived to be the minor leagues, which is exactly opposite of what our founders intended. The action should be at the local level — that’s where elected officials are closest to the needs and priorities of the citizens!

I believe, strongly, that a Constitutionally-limited federal government would encourage more competent state governments. First, there’s nowhere to hide. If a hurricane is bearing down on your coast, and you can’t expect to scapegoat FEMA’s incompetence when the disaster response is, well, a disaster, you might have a workable emergency plan in place. But to the extent that state governments learn dependence on Washington, they are less motivated to take care of themselves.

Second, the issues and responsibilities upon state governments should be greater. Elevating the responsibilities of the state and local governments will encourage more competent folks to seek office. And if it doesn’t, the free market will work as our Founding Fathers intended — there are still fifty states from which to choose.

Many individuals appear unwilling to think about their role and involvement in state government. I understand that people might not just want to pick up and leave if the state government doesn’t meet their high expectations. But it’s your state government! It is, and should be, more accessible than the federal bureaucracy in Washington. So your involvement is necessary to ensure that the state approximates your values and priorities in its execution.

Relying on a “benevolent dictatorship” in the form of an omniscient and increasingly-powerful federal government is a dangerous game. Evidence to date suggests that it doesn’t work all that well. While we have functionally ignored the 10th Amendment to our Constitution for some time now, I’m hopeful that enough people are waking up to the dangers of centralized power that we’ll again legalize the Constitution and the 10th Amendment.

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Explore posts in the same categories: Ron Paul, campaign, free market