External Government

Putting the Big in Big Government

Sun, February 7, 2010 Comments Off by michaeltams

So the federal government employs an all-time high of 2.15 million people. This largest-ever federal payroll will grow by 153,000 people in 2010.

The Administration indicates that this will drop in 2011 as temporary census workers will reduce headcount by 80,000.  Of the 2.15 million, 1.43 million are civilian (non-military) workers.  Remarkably, this figure does not include Postal employees.

In a balanced government scenario, the lion’s share of these government employees would work in the states.  There, they would be closer to their benefactors, where bureaucracy could be checked by common sense and watchdog taxpayers.

As a frame of reference, 2.15 million people is roughly the population of Houston, Texas.

When Bad Government Gets Worse

Tue, April 22, 2008 Comments Off by michaeltams

One of the key ideas I try and communicate in both writing and speaking is that there are all types of government, and the most important government – self-government – is the least practiced.  Distant, external government has no business getting involved in areas that are best administered closest to the people. This is what “Balanced Government” is all about.

Yet, we proceed down a dangerous path, immune, it seems, to the warning signs around us. This story today notes that there is a proposal for expanding the FHA: a Depression-era holdover that defies reason by growing in importance as we move further away from the Depression.

The most noteworthy part of the article (emphasis mine):

The plan would be a massive expansion of the Federal Housing Administration, the Depression-era mortgage insurer. FHA would take on $300 billion in new loans for as many as 1 million distressed homeowners, most of whom otherwise wouldn’t qualify for a government-backed loan.

Taxpayer dollars would be at risk should borrowers default on their new mortgages.

So, most of the homeowners in question wouldn’t qualify for a government-backed loan; yet, they’d be getting one. On top of this, defaults – when they occur – will be borne largely by the American taxpayer. Translated loosely, if you’re not getting one of these loans, you’re acting as the bank with your tax dollars (and no, you don’t get a vote in the credit committee). If we hit a recession and people default? That’s no longer the problem of Bank of America, or Wells Fargo, or Indymac Bank. Now it becomes the problem of the American taxpayer.

The complicated scheme gets worse, but the details aren’t the important point. The important point is that the federal government has no business bailing people out of private contracts they entered into in good faith. Even if one could imagine a scenario whereby having “the government” void a perfectly legal contractual agreement seems like a good idea (and I cannot), there’s absolutely no basis for having that sphere of government be the one that’s furthest away from the people. Hard hit real estate markets – such as Miami or Detroit – will be supported by people from all over the country. Their lack of caution, greed-driven speculation or simple indifference to obligations and lack of respect for contracts shall be subsidized by productive persons who manage their affairs properly and respect the law.

The bill is H.R. 5830: if by some chance you’re calling your representative, you might voice your displeasure specifically with this legislation.

And lest you think imbalance is confined to the realm of bad economics masquerading as “compassion”, there’s this story today about No Child Left Behind. It appears that the federal government is rolling out more laws to regulate the way States – and by extension, parents – educate their children.

To be perfectly clear, Mr. Madison wrote in Federalist #45:

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.

The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. The operations of the federal government will be most extensive and important in times of war and danger; those of the State governments, in times of peace and security. As the former periods will probably bear a small proportion to the latter, the State governments will here enjoy another advantage over the federal government.

To Madison’s list I would add only: administration of the courts.

Amazing, then, that we’ve sunk to the condition we’re in. Will liberty be lost, crowded out by the ever-greater expansion of external government, simply because people aren’t educated on the proper role of the federal government? Or will we once again hold accountable ourselves, our neighbors, and our government?

The Tenth Amendment reads: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” The guidlines are there; the justification has been made; all we’re required to do is learn it and insist on compliance by those we send to represent us.

What is the Proper Role of External Government?

Mon, March 31, 2008 Comments Off by michaeltams

My fascination with this topic is seemingly endless; and seemingly without a shortage of glaring examples with which I can illustrate what is the proper (or, more appropriately: what is the improper) role of “government” between its spheres.

This story today is a prime example.

We are essentially faced with two competing solutions for how to address economic or societal crises. The first goes something like this:

People can’t be trusted; therefore, the activities that people have with each other (even activities seemingly as innocent as a consumer obtaining a mortgage through a broker) must be regulated to protect the parties involved. It is the job, then, of “government” (i.e. distant external, or federal, government) to create the mechanisms to watch, police or otherwise babysit adults in their commercial interactions. This applies to buying a home, obtaining loans, how much you pay for gasoline, if a baseball player is taking drugs, and thousands of other activities. The best way to protect people from themselves and each other is via the creation of bureaucratic entities empowered to interfere in areas that reason would suggest they have no business in.

Or:

We can let the market govern itself. Essentially this is letting the individual govern his or her behavior. Bear Stears goes out of business: wise executives remember the results of greed during the next real estate boom and avoid disaster; and the foolish ones make the same mistake. Then they go out of business, only to serve as a reminder – if you’re bright enough – of the dangers of speculation. The painful correction serves as a regulation of its own, and doesn’t require the plundering of taxpayers to do so, as the prior strategy does.

There are proper responsiblities for every sphere of government, from the self to the most distant external spheres. The more we apply critical thinking in this respect, the more likely we are to foster an environment in which people govern themselves and external government – at least to the degree by which it is enormous today – becomes less important.