When Thomas Jefferson famously said, “The course of history
shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases,” he wasn’t
merely talking about the politics of his day, but the politics of
human behavior across generations and across continents. President
Reagan no doubt had this principle in mind throughout his
presidency. Reagan updated Jefferson with his suggestion that “as
government expands, liberty contracts.”
We hear a lot of rhetoric today about ending the “politics of
the past,” but there is no question more relevant or timely than
the timeless question Jefferson and our other Founders asked: “What
is the proper scope of government that will maximize freedom,
prosperity, and security?” Our key policy debates revolve around
this question, whether politicians admit it or not. The answer from
our Founders, which was enshrined in our Constitution, is
unmistakable: the best government is a limited government.
The past few decades in America have been a story of
progressives who didn’t like that answer slowly unraveling the
limitations on government through Congress and the courts. Consider
where we are today. Since 1999, the total size of government, not
adjusted for inflation, has doubled. Since 2001, non-defense
discretionary spending (spending for things like health care,
education, and the environment that have nothing to do with the
military) has increased 50 percent when adjusted for inflation.
Since 1994, Congress has approved more than 90,000 earmarks. And
every year, Congress creates more and more regulations (i.e., the
health care bill and the financial reform) that take away freedom
in the name of security and progress.
Government today is so big it is almost impossible to measure
how wasteful and incompetent it has become. The defense budget is
such a mess it is impossible to audit. In almost every area of
government there is a tremendous amount of duplication and waste
and barely any metrics or measurements for success.
For instance, we have 70 different sets of bureaucracies in at
least six agencies to help feed hungry people without any way to
measure success. There are at least 105 different programs across
nine agencies to encourage our young people to go into math,
science, and engineering with no way to measure success. We have 78
job training programs outside the Department of Labor that also
have no measurement for success. If these are legitimate federal
roles and a good use of billions of taxpayer dollars, why not have
one or two programs to perform each function instead of 100?
We also have a government that traps children in failing
schools, entices low-income families into mortgages they can’t
afford, offers access to government health care programs
but not health care (Medicaid has a 40 percent denial
rate), and takes away private property through eminent domain and
other land grabs.
With the explosive growth in government this is an important
moment in our history to revisit Jefferson and ask: Has all of this
well-intentioned government made us more prosperous and free? Are
we twice as prosperous when government doubles in size? Has the 50
percent increase in non-defense discretionary spending since 2001
given us 50 percent more opportunity? Obviously, the answer is no.
In just the past two years, spending on discretionary programs has
increased at 16.9 percent while wages have increased less than 2
percent. More troubling, we are on the edge of an economic abyss,
with our $13 trillion debt threatening to bankrupt our country. The
scope of our debt-which has hit 90 percent of our Gross Domestic
Product (GDP)-is already preventing the creation of 1 percent of
GDP a year, which translates into 1 million fewer jobs.
The American people are figuring out that Jefferson isn’t so
antiquated after all. More government gives us less freedom, less
opportunity, and less hope for the future. With Congress’s approval
rating at a well-earned 11 percent, I’m more confident than ever
that “We the People” are poised to take back their government and
their freedom.
