The Proper Role of Government in theory (and in Kirkland)
Neighborhoods like Norkirk are rapidly losing their character due to mega-mansions replacing smaller, older houses. The residents are understandably concerned. This is an unintended consequence of zoning codes interacting with changing market conditions.
The recent Kirkland City budget controversy reminded me of some lessons we all learned in civics class. These lessons are timeless but they seem to be forgotten every now and then. It is important that we remember from where our government is granted its power: the people.
Below I have gathered and reproduced some thought provoking words from another era. This prompted me to examine some of Kirkland’s policies in a new light. Please read the excerpts below as food for thought. They are followed by some comments on recent policies in Kirkland.
The following are excerpts from Ezra Taft Benson, Former Secretary of Agriculture in the Eisenhower Administration, published in 1968.
The Proper Role of Government
“Men in the public spotlight constantly are asked to express an opinion on a myriad of government proposals and projects. “What do you think of TVA?” “What is your opinion of Medicare?” How do you feel about Urban Renewal?” The list is endless. All too often, answers to these questions seem to be based, not upon any solid principle, but upon the popularity of the specific government program in question. Seldom are men willing to oppose a popular program if they, themselves, wish to be popular - especially if they seek public office…
Government Should Be Based Upon Sound Principles
…Such an approach to vital political questions of the day can only lead to public confusion and legislative chaos. Decisions of this nature should be based upon and measured against certain basic principles regarding the proper role of government. If principles are correct, then they can be applied to any specific proposal with confidence…
The Most Important Function Of Government
…It is generally agreed that the most important single function of government is to secure the rights and freedoms of individual citizens. But, what are those rights? And what is their source? Until these questions are answered there is little likelihood that we can correctly determine how government can best secure them. Thomas Paine, back in the days of the American Revolution, explained that:
“Rights are not gifts from one man to another, nor from one class of men to another… It is impossible to discover any origin of rights otherwise than in the origin of man; it consequently follows that rights appertain to man in right of his existence, and must therefore be equal to every man.”…
The Proper Function Of Government
…This means, then, that the proper function of government is limited only to those spheres of activity within which the individual citizen has the right to act. By deriving its just powers from the governed, government becomes primarily a mechanism for defense against bodily harm, theft and involuntary servitude. It cannot claim the power to redistribute the wealth or force reluctant citizens to perform acts of charity against their will. Government is created by man. No man possesses such power to delegate. The creature cannot exceed the creator…
In general terms, therefore, the proper role of government includes such defensive activities, as maintaining national military and local police forces for protection against loss of life, loss of property, and loss of liberty at the hands of either foreign despots or domestic criminals…
Things The Government Should Not Do
…A category of government activity which, today, not only requires the closest scrutiny, but which also poses a grave danger to our continued freedom, is the activity NOT within the proper sphere of government. No one has the authority to grant such powers, as welfare programs, schemes for re-distributing the wealth, and activities which coerce people into acting in accordance with a prescribed code of social planning. There is one simple test. Do I as an individual have a right to use force upon my neighbor to accomplish this goal? If I do have such a right, then I may delegate that power to my government to exercise on my behalf. If I do not have that right as an individual, then I cannot delegate it to government, and I cannot ask my government to perform the act for me…
To be sure, there are times when this principle of the proper role of government is most annoying and inconvenient. If I could only FORCE the ignorant to provided for themselves, or the selfish to be generous with their wealth! But if we permit government to manufacture its own authority out of thin air, and to create self-proclaimed powers not delegated to it by the people, then the creature exceeds the creator and becomes master. Beyond that point, where shall the line be drawn? Who is to say “this far, but no farther?” What clear PRINCIPLE will stay the hand of government from reaching farther and yet farther into our daily lives? We shouldn’t forget the wise words of President Grover Cleveland that “… though the people support the Government the Government should not support the people.” We should also remember, as Frederic Bastiat reminded us, that “Nothing can enter the public treasury for the benefit of one citizen or one class unless other citizens and other classes have been forced to send it in…”
—-
These words were written forty years ago. They may have been somewhat controversial at the time of their writing as President Lyndon Baines Johnson had recently succeeded in passing the “Great Society” legislation. These words remain controversial to this day.
Two main goals of the Great Society social reforms were the elimination of poverty and racial injustice. New major spending programs that addressed education, medical care, urban problems, and transportation were launched during this period. You can read more on the Great Society on Wikipedia.
Over the past forty years America has continued to address the social and economic issues targeted by the Great Society legislation with varying degrees of success. Many of the issues we have today are the same ones we had back in 1968. This situation begs an examination of which reforms have worked well and which have not.
In Kirkland we need good intentions and good results
On a local level, we are faced with a similar reality. We need to periodically review the progress of programs and codes that local government enacts. It is always a good practice to measure the results of yesterday’s legislation and programs so we can better craft those of tomorrow. Good intentions do not equal good results.
The effect of government actions over private activities within our city cannot be underestimated. All the more reason we need to be cautious when we enact policies that are meant to coax or persuade certain outcomes in the private market. It is difficult to predict how communities will react to new rules from the government and we need to be aware of unintended consequences of government actions.
Take for example, the recent housing housing boom in Kirkland that has now ended. Because of various actions taken by the government combined with the rising price of land, the market acted in an unintended way. We found the character of neighborhoods changing before our eyes as new construction supply filled demand for more housing. Because of the high cost of land, builders maximized the value and built the the maximum size allowed by the City. Before long, some neighborhoods were awash in a sea of square box houses that fill every square inch of allowable lot space.
Neighborhoods like Norkirk are rapidly losing their character due to mega-mansions replacing smaller, older houses. The residents are understandably concerned. This is an unintended consequence of zoning codes interacting with changing market conditions. When the good intentions of previous policies are no longer producing the desired results, changes need to be made. The unintended consequences of government actions on the private market cannot be underestimated. This is a reminder that government should always proceed with caution because good intentions do not always equal good results.
Today we seldom read essays delving into the nature of, and proper roll of government. Food for thought.
Print This Article
Print This ArticleRelated Articles
6 Responses to “The Proper Role of Government in theory (and in Kirkland)”
Leave a Reply
Subscribe
You can subscribe by email to receive newsletter updates:
Subscribe through a RSS feed reader
OMG! An interview with Kirkland’s Jason Mesnick from “The Bachelor”
Sponsored Ads
The modern look of new houses in Kirkland is a direct result of height and floor plate limitations combined with increased property values. The areas under most pressure are ones with views. Small but expensive lots make the builders go up to the maximum height and that leaves us with the boxy look. Please see your neighborhood Lux home for an example.
The ADU is an additional unit on top of at tched garages. Most I’ve seen look ugly. The city has changed some rules to allow for small buildings on large lots to better survive but I don’t know if that plan is working yet.
The high price of property is what is driving the growth of large houses on small lots. It is simple economics. Neighbors in those areas may not like it but I can’t think of a solution that could fix it.
[Reply]
Is Norkirk “losing its character” or simply changing its character?
Is Norkirk better when it has small homes on large lots? Better for whom? Those who owned the small homes certainly either moved away or built bigger homes for themselves. So every homeowner who traded their small home for money and or a bigger home all felt it was better to do so.
Most of your quotes indicate that government should play a smaller role in our personal lives, yet you end suggesting that we need new rules that limit what people can do with their homes, one of the most private aspects in our nation.
Personally, I prefer a government that ensures a fairness and equality under the law, but most call this regressive and look to punish one class of people and provide assistance to others (and that assistance in the modern economy, sadly, goes more often to the rich than the poor, which just shows you how messed up such socialist thinking works in a capitalist society).
There’s no such thing as forced charity. Government is not of the people as it reserves many rights to itself that people could never do themselves: 1) take your money; 2) force you to move; 3) imprison you; 4) kill you; and 5) force you to kill others (or else #3).
The number of laws, taxes, regulations and ordinances only grows with time. These all erode liberty in the name of the common good, though very often it’s just imposing one group’s morality on another, or taking one group’s money and giving it to another.
Laws and regulations should strictly be in place only to prevent one party from harming another. Absent a victim, we’d be better to allow people to be free to do as they please.
Fair taxation would impose the same rate on all people for all goods and not claim that one item is “bad” and should be taxed more, while another item is “good” and should get a lower tax or no tax at all. Such fair taxation is called regressive because the poor are not as wealthy as the rich, which is rather self evident. Unfortunately, without fair taxation, we end up with government corruption because there are so many incentives to help one group take the money of another.
Of course, I have no delusions that such ideals would ever come into play. In many ways, the U.S. was more free in previous generations, but of course, those generations managed to oppress whole classes of people (non-whites, poor, immigrants, women, homosexuals) too. Liberty is hard, and many people just can’t stomach the choices and preferences of others, so we get laws and taxes to oppress them. Oh well….
[Reply]
Deeters Reply:
August 10th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
There is nothing “fair” about the so called fair tax. It is the brainchild of Pat Robertson and the far right.
[Reply]
This article is more anger inducing than thought provoking. David uses it as a chance to shill for the Republican party. The Johnson administration opened the door for so many who were shut out because of prejudice and raceism. We still have healing to do in this country. I don’t know of the auhor of the quotes but he probably opposed the Great Society.
Most of what is quoted referrs to federal issues and we don’t have the same issues in Kirkland. The most important role of government is providing a safety net for us all.
[Reply]
Naivite
||Na`ïve`té” (?), n. [F. See Naïve] Native simplicity; unaffected plainness or ingenuousness; artlessness.
Deeters,
With all due respect, Kirkland does not need it’s government overextending its reach by thinking it can provide “a safety net for us all”
Once we have a safety net that can effectivly protect us FROM the government, then we can go about the business of growing our families, businesses and city.
Please use my tax dollars to clone Reagan
[Reply]
Mega Mansions in Norkirk? Give me some addresses so I can go see them. How many of you voted for Growth Management? Did you not read the part that stipulated that population growth would be concentrated within the urban boundaries? I did read it and calculated that on the good side it would significantly raise my property value. I also calculated that my wife and I would not be able to afford to live in Kirkland about now. Well it’s true. Go down to the Peter Kirk Community Center and listen to the seniors moan about how they will have to sell their homes due to the increasing taxes both property and City. My wife and I are nearly at that point. I have faithfully paid my taxes, supported all sorts of Church and social agencies. We have watched in horror as the City Council plundered millions of tax dollars and now have effectveily squelched re development in a downtown that has nothing besides our bank and a couple of restaurants we frequent. So what is the role of government? As a person going on 75 years who served in both Korea and Vietnam and worked for Boeing for over 40 years, it is not as a safety net. I grew up dirt poor, worked my butt off to get an education, raise a family and have a little left over for some vacations. When I pay my taxes I expect that whatever governmental agency gets them that they will be spent wisely and not on people who don’t but could do the same things I did to survive. I look forward to seeing how the Council deals with the budget crisis. I am willing to accept lower levels of service in everything other than police, fire and essential utilities. Everything else is fair game.
[Reply]