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

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. ...

A Teacher Walkout Leader’s Distorted View of School Choice

The Tulsa World recently published a piece by a leader of the teacher walkout a few years ago predictably opposing Governor Stitt’s proposal to expand the Equal Opportunity Education Scholarship program. There is much to take issue with in the piece, which is full of disinformation, but perhaps the most preposterous claim is the following: You’ve probably also heard of “school choice.” The term is extremely misleading because it implies that parents don’t have a choice, when the reality is every parent already has school choice for their child. Parents can choose to send their child to a public school, private school, religious school or even home school. School choice isn’t about giving parents more options. It’s about using taxpayer dollars to give wealthy families a discount on their choice of school. (emphasis added) Try telling that to the truancy officer. The model of public education in America is that we assign every student to a government school base...

Senator Sanders Misses the Mark On Oklahoma Education

Minimum Wage for Teachers Senator Sanders recently wrote an op-ed for the Oklahoman. Among other radical ideas, he proposes a federal minimum wage for teachers of $60,000. In a free market, a minimum wage hurts those who earn less than the minimum wage. If they can’t produce more value than the minimum wage, they will be unemployable. For teachers, who operate in a regulated market, it will still be more difficult for inexperienced teachers to find a job. Incentives to pursue further training and education, or to take on additional roles like advising clubs or coaching sports will be diminished. Or perhaps young teachers will be required to take on one or more of these extracurricular activities to justify their higher cost.   Lost in the promise of a minimum wage is the idea that the best teachers should be paid the most. Instead, most public school teachers in Oklahoma are paid in lockstep - meaning that an outstanding teacher makes the same as a mediocre teacher wit...

Spending Big on Public Education

Well, it’s not quite a record, but it’s close. Last school year (2018-19), per-pupil spending on public education in Oklahoma reached $10,000 (rounded by $4 and adjusted to 2015 dollars), only a little behind the zenith reached ten years earlier. That year (2008-2009), the federal government threw money at banks and states in an effort to reverse the beginning of the Great Recession. Across the nation, public education was at first insulated from the recession’s effects while taxpayers suffered job and home losses. But now, despite a gradual decline in public education funding for several years, Oklahoma’s public education spending has speedily and fully recovered, and then some. For several years, per-pupil spending in Oklahoma public schools fell to levels last seen in the 1990s. But then, two years ago, Oklahoma’s legislators apparently resolved to show they could spend as freely as any before them. Funding had recovered almost to the level seen in 2000 (see the chart). ...