Thanks Congress, but No Thanks

Sometimes I like to imagine what it might be like to sort of, you know, put federal government in their place. Anybody who knows me very well knows by now that I am not too impressed with the direction President Obama is taking this country, and even less impressed by the direction our Congress has been taking us for the last several years. Comments on the Internet about their performance are usually very vitriolic and are normally one of two flavors: Democrats are the best thing ever and Republicans stink, or the other way around. I think those arguments are silly. How can you logically point a finger at one side or the other? They're all complicit in our current situation.

I think the solution to the federal government sticking their oversized proboscis in the business of the American people and their greasy palms in their wallets is quite simple. The states simply say to Obama-Pelosi-Reid et al. a simple "Thanks, but no thanks." Then, after talking the talk, we'd walk the walk. Here's what I mean.

First, the states would not accept any "stimulus" money from the federal government. No matter how badly we are hurting, we just don't take it. This would have to be a mandate from the people to the state and local leaders. The message would be this: "We don't take welfare from the feds." Then the local governments, businesses, and public would work it out in the classic free-market way: those that cannot survive, fail.

Second, you are going to have states, like California, that have put themselves in a bad situation that probably will take the money. Fine. You take the money, California, and you, alone, are responsible for the debt that is incurred. Responsible states, like Alaska, that have built up a reserve will not pay for your stupidity. You are on the hook for it. Take what you want, but when the bill comes due it will have your name at the top. I understand that a state is no more and no less than the people who live there. Government doesn't produce, so the taxes from your people will have to pay for it. If people move out of your state and stop paying your taxes, too bad. I guess you go bankrupt and watch as your state is absorbed piece-by-piece by your surrounding, solvent states. Goodbye California, hello New Alaska.

The question is, why can't the states just say no to the federal government? Why can't they just tell it that they have no interest in its help? The fact is, the states can work it out on their own if they just will. Our Founding Fathers would be absolutely astounded at the ridiculous nature of this federal bailout. That isn't what the federal government is supposed to be doing!

Furthermore, the states have the power to tell the federal government that it has very few powers granted it by the constitution and this stimulus isn't part of those powers. They do this by NOT ACCEPTING THE MONEY!!! Yes, the feds can have some taxes to defend us from foreign enemies and provide some other necessary functions, but the states need to get some cajones, if you know what I'm saying, and tell the feds that they need to trim the fat from the budget (mostly by cutting the welfare for special interests and/or campaign donors). Our federal government is a run-away train the only thing that is going to put the brakes on it is lots and lots of people, in the form of states, telling them to STOP THE SPENDING! If we hit a depression, so be it. The only thing worse than a depression is a government that thinks it needs to stop it and will go to any length to do that.

How did the federal government get to be so independent of the people who allow it to exist in the first place? For one reason and one reason alone: We allowed it to happen. Well, we can rein it back in if we will. We just have to be willing to make whatever sacrifice is necessary to make that happen.

I know this is a simple approach. That is why a whole bunch of experts would say "it won't work." I disagree. I think we need a simple approach to this. I think we need real leaders who will stand up for the right principles and allow the consequences to happen, knowing that things will be better, at least for our progeny. Think of the American Revolutionary War. Our soldiers were not being paid much, or anything at the end, they were ill-equipped, outnumbered, out-flanked, and out-everythinged by the Brits. Where was their strength?

First, they had a real leader, George Washington, who was not in it for his own personal power or glory. He saw the need for a complete breakaway from England, wanted liberty for the people and their posterity, and was willing to go to the extreme without giving up principles. He inspired those sad and pathetic troops to give it all so we could be unencumbered by what? By oppressive government determined to make the colonies dependent on it. They said no, I say no. I see very little difference between an oppressive mother-state trying to keep its colonies dependent and subservient, and an oppressive federal government determined to make the states dependent on it. Those colonies, may I remind the reader, were part of England. Our states are part of the United States of America. The colonies were a small part of the holdings of the British Empire. The states, and here is our strength, is all the federal government has.

I do not wish to be an enemy or a traitor of our great land. I love it. I love what it is supposed to be, though, and not what it is becoming. I love what it has been, and not what it is now. I believe in it. But I'm not naive enough to believe that we don't now have, nor will we never have domestic enemies, whatever their motives. Corruption in Washington, the constant backscratching that happens there, is making domestic enemies of the state out of our so-called leaders. It has to stop. I think it will be, must be, the voice of the people through their states that will halt this ridiculous spending until the next election. Then, if they haven't returned to principles, our government leaders will be fired and we will have representatives that will at least know that we are not tolerant of the corruption.

I know this has been a long essay. I have only one more thing to add. There are people that we say are in high places with lots of cash and hence lots of influence. We erroneously believe that because we lack the cash and hence the influence which they have, that we are not able to effect change. Yes, maybe they can pay off politicians. Maybe they can more easily get into a position of candidacy themselves. Who chooses the leaders though? Ultimately, We the People have the power, don't we? We get to choose who makes and enforces these laws, and who appoints people to judge. The government belongs to us. I am not going to condemn Barack Obama wholesale, or any member of congress, just because of their party or platform. If they violate principle, though, that is when I will not stand still. I feel like they are violating principle. Even though I have a lot of responsibilities in different areas, I resolve to be as involved in the choosing of men and women of principle as I can possibly be.