Skip to main content

Gratitude for Restrained Government, and Restraints on Government


We at the 1889 Institute spend a lot of time critiquing government. I mean a lot. It’s what we do: we want to make government the best it can be, and that starts with identifying its flaws. But it is important, from time to time, to acknowledge that on the whole, Americans have it pretty good when it comes to governance. Here’s what I’m thankful for in government this year: 

National defense. We live in perhaps the freest society that has ever existed. That would assuredly not be so if it were not for our strong commitment to deterring every foreign threat to our national sovereignty. What use is restrained government if a country is not safe from foreign invaders?

Courts. Courts not only determine who is guilty of a crime and who is not, they also provide a forum to resolve sometimes vicious disputes without violence. If free trade is the bridge to human flourishing, then a legal system that upholds property rights, enforces contracts, and deters crime forms the truss of that bridge. 

Police. They are the enforcement arm of the courts (eventually, if you continue to defy the courts, these are the men and women with guns who ensure you do what you are told or escort you to jail). They provide general deterrence to criminal activity (the threat of arrest that keeps many honest people honest). They provide specific deterrence to the criminal element (locking them away from the public). While not every individual action taken by every individual officer is without fault, they are, on the whole, undeniably a force for good.  

Roads. Roads facilitate trade. They make everyone better off - those who commute an hour every day, and those who are homebound and have their needs delivered courtesy of giant online retailers. 

Freedom of speech. We have an almost-absolute right to think, say and write what we want. This is subject to very limited exceptions - each of which has a good justification. 

Freedom of religion. We have a broad rights to worship as we please without government interference. While there is work left to be done to ensure that freedom of conscience does not stop where freedom to earn a living begins, there has never been a time when so many people were so free to worship as they choose. This is not a call to let up on fighting for the next inch - give an inch the secular extremists will take a mile. But it is well worth being thankful. For most of history a man’s birth determined his religion. For most of history a woman’s husband determined her religion. While parentage still carries exceptional weight in determining religion, there is no government thumb on the scale pushing people towards or away from their parents’ religion. This is as it ought to be. 

Due process. We have broad rights to ensure that the government doesn’t get too involved in our lives. If we are charged with a crime, there is a whole process dedicated to giving us a chance to clear our name. We also enjoy a presumption of innocence, which starts before charges are ever filed: that is why warrants are required before (most) searches may be legally conducted. 

Right to keep and bear arms. Lest these important protections become nothing more than parchment barriers, we have the right to keep and bear arms. This is both so law abiding citizens have the means to defend themselves, and so would-be tyrants meet armed resistance at home before they can conquer the world. There is a reason that every tyrant disarms his own populace before he reveals his tyranny. 

Interestingly, many of the things I’m most thankful for in Government are its limitations. While government is incredibly necessary to human flourishing, restraints on government power are part and parcel of good government necessary for human flourishing. 

Mike Davis is Research Fellow at 1889 Institute. He can be reached at mdavis@1889institute.org.

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the official position of 1889 Institute.


Popular posts from this blog

About Those Roads in Texas

A s Sooner fans head south for the OU-Texas game next week, they will encounter a phenomenon most of us are familiar with: as you cruise across the Red River suddenly the road gets noticeably smoother. The painted lane stripes get a little brighter and the roadside “Welcome to Texas” visitors’ center gleams in the sunlight, a modern and well-maintained reminder of how much more money the Lonestar State spends on public infrastructure than little old Oklahoma. Or does it? Why are the roads so much, well… better in Texas? Turns out, it isn’t the amount of money spent, at least not when compared to the overall size of the state’s economy and personal income of its inhabitants. Research conducted by 1889 Institute’s Byron Schlomach reveals that Oklahoma actually spends significantly more on roads than Texas as a percentage of both state GDP and personal income . And that was data from 2016, before Oklahoma’s tax and spending increases of recent years. The gap is likely gr...

Top-Ten in Low Taxes, But Oklahoma Still Has Much Room for Improvement

In a comparison of states’ total taxes as well as spending in certain broad categories that the 1889 Institute has just published ( Oklahoma Government Revenues and Spending in Perspective – Update ), some interesting facts arise. Using federal data, we compared states by looking at the percentage of personal income collected in state and local government revenues. We also looked at the percentage of personal income spent in six broad spending categories: higher education, public education, public welfare, hospitals, highways, and corrections. The data shows that in 2017 Oklahoma’s state and local governments: Extract 13.2 percent of Oklahomans’ personal income in taxes and fees, moving Oklahoma into the Top Ten lowest-taxing states, ahead of Texas.   Spend 12.38 percent of personal income on the six featured spending areas (which include federal dollars), only a little below the national average of 12.7 percent. While 9th overall (least spent being first), Oklahoma is n...

Present Reforms to Keep the Ghost of State Questions Past from Creating Future Headaches

Oklahoma, like many western states, allows its citizens to directly participate in the democratic process through citizen initiatives and referendums. In a referendum, the legislature directs a question to the people — usually to modify the state constitution, since the legislature can change statutes itself. An initiative requires no legislative involvement, but is initiated by the people via signature gathering, and can be used to modify statute or amend the constitution. Collectively, the initiatives and referendums that make it onto the ballot are known as State Questions.   Recently, there have been calls to make it more difficult to amend the constitution. At least two proposals are being discussed. One would diversify the signature requirement by demanding that a proportional amount of signatures come from each region of the state. The other would require a sixty percent majority to adopt a constitutional amendment rather than the fifty percent plus one currently in place. ...

Religious Freedom and School Choice in the Nation's High Court

When the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) begins its term next week, one of the many important cases it will consider is that of Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue , which addresses Montana’s Tax Credit Scholarship program, and gives the high court an opportunity to decide whether Blaine Amendments (which generally prohibit any state money from going to a “sectarian” purpose) violate the establishment and free exercise clauses of the first amendment, as well as the and equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. At the very least, the justices should rule on whether Blaine Amendments (like Section II-5 of the Oklahoma Constitution) can be used to exclude religious schools from school choice programs which insulate the state from direct subsidy of religious organizations through the “genuine, independent choice of private individuals.”   The question presented to the court is “Whether it violates the religion clauses or the equal protection clause of th...