On big government

One of the perennial political battles in America is between those who favor a large and powerful central government to advance social issues and those who favor a smaller, less powerful and less intrusive government. There is no doubt that a strong central government can impose important social advances on the nation, as the Civil Rights Act shows. But those who continue to favor a strong central government might want to consider the lessons of the present administration, which has used the powers of a strong central government to impose on the nation its minority religious views on issues like family planning policy and stem cell research, and to impede progress on critical issues like global warming and preserving the environment.

There is no doubt that a strong central government comprised of wise and far-sighted leaders (the ones that agree with us, of course) could do much good. If only we could be sure such a powerful government would always be in such good hands. The problem is that that same strong central government, in the hands of short-sighted or more self-serving leaders, can do enormous damage, as dictatorships around the world prove daily, and there is no way to ensure that our leaders are always going to be wise and far-sighted. Indeed, the evidence of history would suggest that wise and far-sighted government leaders are few and far between, and that voters aren’t especially good at putting them into office.

Given that, I’d just as soon that central government not get too big and powerful. It’s too dangerous a weapon to leave lying about for the more ambitious and unscrupulous among us.