We liberty-lovers are, self-admittedly, a pretty idealistic bunch.
Among other things we advocate righteous living, personal responsibility, and limited government. Yet none of the goals which we strive for can be attained overnight. This often leads to frustration on our part due to impatience, losing faith, and persecution from those who support socialism and Satan’s plan of coercion. We are accused of being inhumane and callous because we call for an end to the welfare state because we do not believe that the false philanthropy peddled by the government is beneficial to the giver or to the receiver. As Frederic Bastiat put it so well in his short-yet-powerful work, “The Law”:
…every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all.
We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.
And so we often trudge through our days, fighting with ourselves to balance our ideals with the realities of life.
Let me offer you some hope. Let me offer you what I consider a good balance between our ideals and reality, a starting point that will allow us to move forward toward our goals gradually and constitutionally.
Several months ago, as I was planning a run for political office, I felt the need to speak out against the welfare state that we live in. As part of my platform I was prepared to pledge to end the welfare state by eliminating costly benefit and entitlement programs that were often milked by dishonest people and abused by administrators to benefit individuals who did not need assistance. But my wife saw my idealism and was able to provide insight that I would have otherwise missed. By eliminating welfare programs altogether I would be kicking the crutch out from under individuals and families that did not know better, and that people who were taught their entire lives to rely on the government for support would be suddenly and without warning left homeless, hungry, and without medical attention. Was that truly the Christian thing to do?
Her insight inspired me to look for a better plan – a principled plan – that would gradually put an end to the welfare state and other corrupt programs while allowing for an immediate increase in freedom. For several weeks I worked to put together the final product, and I would like to submit that product to you in the hopes that it can be used as a starting point for government reform by people in many different states. And, most importantly, I feel that this plan takes into account the restored Gospel of Jesus Christ, the constitutional principles that we are to befriend, and the charity that He has commanded us to share with others.
———————————-
THE PENNSYLVANIA FIRST PLAN
At the heart of the Pennsylvania First plan are the ideas of individual and state sovereignty.
In the Declaration of Independence we read:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”
The 9th and 10th Amendments were added to the Constitution so that there would be a clear line that the federal government could not cross, namely that any power not specifically delegated to the federal government by the Constitution would be reserved to the states, or the people:
Amendment 9 – “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
Amendment 10 – “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.”
In 1968 former Secretary of Agriculture Ezra Taft Benson stated:
“Obviously, not all welfare-state programs currently in force can be dropped simultaneously without causing tremendous economic and social upheaval … Translated into practical terms, this means that the first step toward restoring the limited concept of government should be to freeze all welfare-state programs at their present level, making sure that no new ones are added. The next step would be to allow all present programs to run out their term with absolutely no renewal. The third step would involve the gradual phasing-out of those programs which are indefinite in their term. In my opinion, the bulk of the transition could be accomplished within a ten-year period and virtually completed within twenty years.”
Secretary Benson went on to add that this process could be undertaken by the Congress of the United States and overseen by the president. Unfortunately, our Congress and president would never sign on to such a program. They enjoy their power and fame far too much. The decentralization of power must be initiated by the states and achieved through a gradual transition of responsibility from the federal government to the state governments. Pennsylvania can, and should, lead the way. The three-step program to meet this goal is outlined in the following pages.
STEP ONE: A DECLARATION OF SOVEREIGNTY AND SEPARATION
As Secretary Benson stated over forty years ago, the first step toward restoring the limited concept of government should be to freeze all welfare-state programs at their present level, making sure that no new ones are added.
The Pennsylvania General Assembly must first issue a resolution that puts the federal government on notice that we will no longer be subject to their unconstitutional mandates. Attempts have already been made to achieve this goal. In 2009 Representative Sam Rohrer sponsored HR95, a bold statement asserting Pennsylvania’s 10th Amendment rights. He found 61 more representatives in the House who supported the bill. Senator Mike Folmer introduced a similar bill, SR51, and nine other Senators co-sponsored. In 2010 more legislation was introduced in order to protect Pennsylvanians from the unconstitutional health care mandates passed down by the federal government. We need to pass these bills and follow them with action, not just more talk.
Once we have reaffirmed our state sovereignty the Pennsylvania General Assembly must pass legislation that allows for:
- A suspension of any new spending programs at the state level.
- The nullification of any new unconstitutional spending programs at the federal level.
The most difficult step in this process is the initial launch of the plan. The federal government acts upon us very much like gravity acts upon a rocket – the greatest amount of force and determination is required to simply lift the rocket off the ground. Once this first stage has been completed the process becomes much easier. The Pennsylvania First plan will work in the same manner. The initial separation from the federal government will be the most difficult part of the process. We will have few friends in the federal government who will help us with this process. We will be threatened and denied federal funding, but this should only increase our resolve to finish the separation and move on.
STEP TWO: A TRANSITION OF POWER
Once the initial separation is completed, Pennsylvania can move forward as a sovereign state. The most time-consuming step of the Pennsylvania First plan is the second step. A committee of lawmakers, business owners and citizens can be formed that will be charged with the job of examining every federal program to determine whether it should be:
- Adhered to
- Nullified immediately
- Absorbed into state government
It should be noted that this plan is not intended to do away with the federal government completely. The federal government does have a proper role. The Constitution makes that role quite clear. Any federal programs that fall outside of that role need to be either nullified immediately or absorbed into the state government so that Pennsylvanians can decide how they want to handle the program. It is crucial that we do not nullify and end programs that people are relying on. You cannot kick the crutch out from under a person with a broken leg and expect them to stand on their own. Likewise, those who are receiving welfare benefits should be allowed to continue receiving those benefits until they are able to support themselves. The gradual and low-pressure nature of this transitory period will allow Pennsylvanians to make decisions regarding which welfare programs to publicly fund and which ones can be replaced by private organizations.
Examples of departments that can be absorbed by the state government are:
- Education
- Agriculture
- Commerce
- Energy
- Health and Human Services
- Housing and Urban Development
- Labor
- Transportation
The existing tax stream that flows out of Pennsylvania to the federal government will be diverted to the state government so that welfare programs remain fully funded. In essence, we will simply keep our money and our programs in-house instead of paying the federal government to give money back to the state. The absorption of these departments and programs into the state government will have an additional benefit to Pennsylvania: more jobs. In the midst of the worst economic recession since the Great Depression these new opportunities could mean thousands of jobs, at least temporarily.
STEP THREE: LEADING BY EXAMPLE
Of course, the question that naturally follows such a proposal is “what happens next?” Once our state government has absorbed the federal programs and the people are able to demand greater accountability from their representatives, it is imperative that Pennsylvania continues to lead by example.
Without the fear of being punished by the federal government we can begin to make changes to the size and scope of our state government. When the time is right we can:
- Make our legislature part-time.
- Eliminate wasteful salary and benefit packages for government officials.
- Eliminate wasteful administrative positions and salaries.
- Enact laws that will make elections free and fair for all.
- Further localize programs.
- Reform the pension system.
- ELIMINATE MOST TAXES.
Decentralization will help us to overcome the problem of public mistrust, make government become more sensitive to the people, and improve the quality of services provided by the government. We will have to shake off our apathy and work hard to elect wise representatives who will not seek to restore centralized government by handing power back to the feds. That will be the key to ensuring future success and maintaining long-lasting prosperity.
Pennsylvania must work with other state governments so that they can follow our lead. Once Pennsylvania declares its sovereignty and begins the decentralization process it is quite possible that over one dozen other states would quickly follow suit. Critics cannot consider this to be an act of secession because we are simply reaffirming and taking control of our rights as a sovereign state and a sovereign people. We do not seek to destroy the union, only to strengthen it.
It is time that Pennsylvanians decide what is best for Pennsylvania. I hope that you will join me in support of this plan and that you will provide your input so that we can become a freer and more prosperous people.
“You cannot kick the crutch out from under a person with a broken leg and expect them to stand on their own. Likewise, those who are receiving welfare benefits should be allowed to continue receiving those benefits until they are able to support themselves.”
Your comment basically highlights the utility of “welfare.” Time limits and other restrictions essentially limit the ability of welfare to substitute itself as an income, and monthly benefits are the lowest they’ve been in decades due to the popular myth of welfare leeches and “gamers” of the system.
Most families on welfare are on for no more than a few years, and are based on “cost of living” estimates which continue to account disproportionately for food even as food becomes less of a crucial expense in American society. Almost all welfare recipients have had recent work experience so, by and large, the comparison of public aid as a “crutch” is quite apt. Only the most insecure or insensitive individual would tell a multiple-fracture sufferer to shut up and stand up, and likewise “get a job!” sounds as absurd as “why don’t you get married?” It’s a question that is blindingly obvious enough to make the asker smug while providing no benefit.
Now, this gets into basic libertarian principles – overestimating the ability of the free market to serve as a safety net for people in desperate situations, despite the fact that our nation’s history before labor laws and regulation were enacted is essentially one of exploitation and life-threatening injuries as death sentences for families without working-aged children. The question of how to solve these social problems seems like a better one than trumpeting the “natural rights” of families who were dealt a bad hand to starve or lose their homes.
For the most part, Doug, I like what you stand for. You have some good ideas and they appear to be able to put us on the right track, but there is a huge problem. The government, federal or state, is like a locomotive moving down the wrong track at 60 mph. How are you going to overcome the inertia of the out-of-control train, bring it to a stop, push it backwards beyond the fork, and then pull it down the right track? Remember, you will not have much help from the people and almost all of your fellow legislators and senators will stand against you. They will give you lip-service and pat you on the back publically, but they will not support you when it comes time to vote. Consider this, if Ezra Taft Benson with all his knowledge and broad political influence could not effect change, how are you going to do it? I am not looking to take the wind out of your sails, but I don’t see you enjoying success when you are surrounded by dishonest representatives who are too busy pursuing their own agendas than to concern themselves with making things right.
What say you? :-)
Paul
Paul, you have correctly identified the Kingmen of our day, but you’re lack of faith in the cause of freedom is disturbing. We are FREE men, and I firmly believe that there are enough of us, indeed the majority of us, who still support this cause today.
Doug, this is an amazing plan! I fully support it. Don’t listen to the kingmen or the cowards who would put it down.
May God bless each of our united, sovereign states!
Doug,
I am still waiting to hear back from you about what your plan is. Not the plan to resolve the problems you listed, but the plan to get the necessary support from the Senate and Legislature that can actually make your plan a success. Without their support, you won’t get anything done and will lose your bid for reelection. This is how it works. Don’t listen to the do-gooders and defenders of the faith, like Morgan, who would gladly and willfully ignore sound advice, charge across a mine field, and get himself blown up along with anyone else who was stupid enough to follow him.
Again, I am not looking to take the wind out of your sails. But you absolutely must know the end from the beginning before you start this journey. There is potentially an enormous cost involved here too, in getting elected. You must be fully aware of the consequences, good or bad. And don’t be fooled into thinking that it is all a matter of faith. A man who believes with all his heart that he can jump off a cliff, flap is wings (arms), and fly safely to the ground will die in astonishment if he tries it. I make this point only to demonstrate that faith does not provide a person with super-natural powers, as people like Morgan may actually believe.
Paul
Paul,
Thanks for the comments and question.
We held our primary election just a few weeks ago. I received 16% of the vote – 1,232 votes, to be exact. I finished third in the four-man race.
I’ve run the emotional gamut since then…of course I was disappointed in the results at first. I’d be lying if I said I didn’t feel a tinge of frustration from time to time. But looking back at the whole experience, including the final results, I am quickly becoming more optimistic about the future. I just finished reading “Many Are Called, But Few Are Chosen” by H. Verlan Andersen…great book. There was an interesting afterword by his child included some of Andersen’s thoughts on opposition and facing a foe who seemingly towers over you, and I think it answers your question about what individuals can do when faced by such a staggering task.
We have to have faith in God and his Plan. We have to understand that the opposition only makes us stronger. We have to remember that Heavenly Father’s plan centers around our agency and the challenge of this life is to bring others closer to God through persuasion, not coercion.
So moving forward, I’m going to keep pitching my plan because I think the ideas are good. I am becoming even more active in the liberty-associated organizations that I have helped to start. I’m hoping that we’ll make it to 2012 and by that time I will have had thousands of opportunities to educate and awaken the apathetic people here in Pennsylvania. It’s going to be hard, but it will be fun and I know that I’m doing what I can to promote constitutional principles and the free agency of man.
It’s been said in the past and it’s worth saying again – I’ve read the book, and I know how it ends :)
Does that answer your question?
Doug,
I suppose you’ve answered my question well enough. I am sure you are a good LDS and that the members of your ward and stake are proud of you. All my best for you and your family. Just remember that family comes first. :-)
Paul
I’m not from the state but I’d say try again. I like the plan you present. I would say that the states do need to take back control of many federal programs but I also feel that the process needs to continue. Once on the state level, I feel it would be wise to return additional responsibility over to counties, cities, communities, and then to families, as much as is possible. As families and neighbors, we know best the situations of individuals within our communities i.e. who has lost a job, suffered injury and illness, have new babies, suffered a loss, etc. We, as communities also are generally more aware of our needs with regards to our our transportation, libraries, parks, police, and fire, etc. Government is a must but the majority of the money should be in the hands of the communities and individuals. Money goes a lot father when you cut out ALL of the middle-men. Beyond the financial…nothing brings greater joy to an individual than helping out their families and neighbors, very little brings greater humility than being the recipient of assistance from those around you. I feel that government has taken away much more than our money. They have taken away responsibility, desires to assist, and the joys that come with serving others. The only way to restore these things is to put the majority of responsibility and power back into the hands of those who are on the base of the political pyramid.
A good plan. Do what is right, let the consequence follow. Thank you for standing up for what is right!