06 Oct Shut Down for Good, Perhaps
“Essential services will continue,” we were told when the federal government shutdown started a week ago. Those essential services included Social Security payments, air traffic control, and the four that start with M: military operations, Medicare, Medicaid, and mail delivery. Using an acronym like any government would, we can call these six the crucial duties of Uncle SAMMM.
As most things do, this got me to thinking about something: If only these six services are essential, why would the federal government ever do the many other things it normally does? In other words, why does it take a shutdown to stop the federal government from doing unnecessary things? Is not our federal government “limited” in its responsibilities, as well as its powers?
Let’s open up and explore these questions a bit.
Only What Must Be Done by the U.S. Government
You may recall from my past blogging and podcasting that I am a big believer in the principle of limited government. It is one of my seven key principles for Principle Based Politics (the others being freedom and free enterprise, protecting the vulnerable, law and justice, transparency, equality, and religious freedom and separation). In short, the federal government should do only what must be done that others cannot do.
Essential services, to put it even more succinctly, are what our federal government should be limited to providing.
I get this philosophy mainly from the U.S. Constitution and its Tenth Amendment, which provides: “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.” I understand this language to mean the federal government can do only what the U.S. Constitution expressly says it can. I have written about this at length in other posts.
While We Wait
Despite the principle of limited government and my beliefs in said principle, I predict the current shutdown will result in outcry regarding all of the hardships people are suffering and the many entities being irreparably harmed. Farmers and other subsidy recipients will want their payments. Researchers will want their grants. National Park visitors will want their toilet paper.
Factory managers will want their production lines inspected by OSHA. Well, maybe not. Banks, investment companies, and auditors will want their reserves, disclosures, and procedures scrutinized by their OCC, SEC, and PCAOB regulators, respectively, right? Respectfully, NOT!
Even more than any of the above, laid off or fired federal workers will want their jobs back. I don’t blame them for feeling that way, but the purpose of the government is not to provide full employment through the federal payroll. The optimal role of the federal government is to stay out of the way so that the private sector can thrive, which in turn will provide jobs.
These are things Congress and the White House should be considering when deciding how much spending to approve for the next budget. Until they figure that out, we can continue the natural experiment of seeing how well Americans can live without “federal services” – a euphemism that always brings to my mind Ronald Reagan’s “nine most terrifying words in the English language,” which were “I’m from the Government and I’m here to help.”
I predict that our congressional and presidential budget busters eventually will buckle and just keep spending what they have been spending (or more) because, after all, that is how they get re-elected (or so they think). In the meantime, while we have the opportunity, let’s see how much “help” from the feds we can get by without.
Written by Quentin R. Wittrock, founder of Principle Based Politics.
Look for his periodic posts, as this blog and the Extremely Non-Extreme podcast will explore and promote the ideas of principles and non-extremism in politics.
Principle Based Politics does not endorse or support any particular political candidate or party.
James Loerts
Posted at 12:37h, 07 OctoberWhy the majority of people in Congress cannot see things the way you have articulated is beyond me. Conservatives would benefit because of lower taxes and liberals would benefit because money would actually get to the people who need it instead of being spent on administrative costs in one overlapping program after another. And yet here we are, and will continue to be.
Dave Glesne
Posted at 13:13h, 07 OctoberWell said, Quentin!
Kim Cosens
Posted at 14:44h, 07 OctoberCouldn’t agree more. Less government allows the people to think for themselves and come up with solutions that might actually benefit them. Free enterprise and entrepreneurial will flourish. Personal responsibility would actually be required instead of living off the government.
Russell Weaver
Posted at 15:20h, 07 October“‘Essential services will be continued’, we were told” Someone must have defined essential services. Who is credited for defining “essential services”?
Quentin
Posted at 16:33h, 07 OctoberMy guess is the federal agencies themselves define what is essential. The president is their boss. Therefore, anyone who voted for him and doesn’t like the definitions chosen, it’s on them to let him know.
Gary Russell
Posted at 16:21h, 07 OctoberVery well stated. I wonder if the budget could balance if we restricted ourselves to just the “essential” services ? I’ve also wondered why mail delivery can only be done by the Gov’t?
DKnight
Posted at 00:53h, 08 OctoberYou put someone in charge of a government office, provide staff and a budget–and they want to grow it. The next year, they demand more people and more money. Government freaks love crisis–it provides an excuse for more government power. No–I’m not anti-tax or anti-government. Yet, we must understand that government will replicate like a virus–if we don’t inoculate ourselves against it. And–yes–some vaccinations are good. Too much government restricts freedom and eventually becomes dangerous. Unfortunately, Congress appears unable to control government. The executive branch may provide the only chance to shrink the size and scope of government. Good post–we all seem to agree,