Federal Government Unshackled!

By unanimous order of the convention, on September 17, 1787, the United States Constitution was deemed completed, and ready for submission to the States for ratification. The delegates were satisfied that the new government would stand the test of time, and deny the rise of a tyranny if the Constitution was followed as originally intended, and if the people remained informed and active in their duty of keeping the republic.

I ran for city council in 2010. After a debate in front of an audience in a neighborhood known for two things, being over the age of 55, and consisting of a large percentage of high-propensity voters, a gentleman walked up to me and asked, “You said you believe in limited government. What do you plan to take away? The senior center? A park?”

His definition of a limited government was not the same as mine. Today’s voters have been programmed to believe that salvation comes through government. They have been taught to believe that if government doesn’t grab the reins of something, it won’t get done, or it won’t exist.

The gentleman’s definition of limited government was that it was a sinister idea that included the removal of needed services and government programs that he felt were a necessary part of his world. Without a government with full ability to do as it desires, from the point of view of some people, there will be no emergency services, no libraries, no safety net, and so forth.

I recognized that we did not see eye to eye regarding the definition of limited government, so I asked him about it. He said, “Limited government means smaller government, with things taken away until government is gone, and what remains is nothing but anarchy and chaos.”

His response was as I suspected it would be. I said, “Sir, I appreciate your concern, but to be honest, that is not what I meant. My definition of a limited government is one that operates within the authorities granted to it.”

When the delegates of the Philadelphia Convention assembled at Independence Hall in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in 1787, their aim was to create a new central government that was stronger than the one that existed under the Articles of Confederation (written and signed during the American Revolution in 1777), yet a government restrained in such a way that it did not interfere with State Sovereignty, nor the concept of localism (the concept that local issues should only be administered by local government and local communities).

The way I like to put it is that what we had under the Articles of Confederation was a lamb. What we needed was a lion. The problem with lions, however, is that they eat you. So, how do you create a lion powerful enough to provide for the common defense, but restrained in such a way that it is not unleashed as a threat to the people of the United States?

The key is to place shackles on the ankles of the lion, and place it in a cage.

Those shackles, and the cage, which are designed to restrain the lion we call the federal government, is the United States Constitution. However, the original intent of the Constitution is not being followed, which has resulted in the federal government becoming unshackled, and therefore a threat to the citizens of the United States.

In today’s political environment, the States and We the People have come to fear the federal government. We fear standing against it. How is it that a federal government designed to serve the States and serve the people has expanded to the point that we now believe it is us who are supposed to serve it?

Unfortunately, returning to originally intended constitutional principles and philosophies is not as simple as flipping a switch. The process ahead of us is long and arduous, and it begins with education.

– Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary