According to the Associated Press, the federal government estimates our federal budget deficit at $1.42 trillion. As the AP states, "It’s more than the total national debt for the first 200 years of the Republic, more than the entire economy of India, almost as much as Canada’s, and more than $4,700 for every man, woman and child in the United States. It’s . . . more than three times the most red ink ever amassed in a single year."
This, of course, is only one year's red ink. We have a federal debt (i.e., accumulated over the years) of trillions of dollars. History has shown that nations with out-of-control debts and deficits are subject to hyperinflation, overtaxation, or fiscal breakdowns. Governments desperate for revenue and debt reduction overstep their constitutional boundaries and imperil the unalienable rights of citizens. We must tread carefully, or our economic - and political - demise will only become inevitable.
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
The True Meaning of Freedom
The Good Book says, "Be free, yet without using freedom as a pretext for evil, but as slaves of God." 1 Peter 2:16.
This very old fashioned understanding of the true meaning of freedom was deeply ingrained in the Founding Fathers. As explained in the Declaration of Independence, they strongly believed that all men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That God given freedom, however, was not given to men and women to simply do whatever they felt like doing – that is licentiousness. To the contrary, the Founders believed that men and women must exercise their freedoms carefully, with appropriate restraint, and for the common welfare.
Today, too many seem to have lost sight that being free to do something doesn’t mean that you must do it. We have too often blurred the distinction between legality and morality. Just because we can do something doesn’t mean we should – or that it is defensible to do so. Prudence, frugality, honesty, integrity, honor – these timeless virtues need to be embraced to prove our worth of the freedom we possess.
This very old fashioned understanding of the true meaning of freedom was deeply ingrained in the Founding Fathers. As explained in the Declaration of Independence, they strongly believed that all men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That God given freedom, however, was not given to men and women to simply do whatever they felt like doing – that is licentiousness. To the contrary, the Founders believed that men and women must exercise their freedoms carefully, with appropriate restraint, and for the common welfare.
Today, too many seem to have lost sight that being free to do something doesn’t mean that you must do it. We have too often blurred the distinction between legality and morality. Just because we can do something doesn’t mean we should – or that it is defensible to do so. Prudence, frugality, honesty, integrity, honor – these timeless virtues need to be embraced to prove our worth of the freedom we possess.
Friday, October 23, 2009
Chavez: Freedom of Speech Must Be Limited
Venezuela's Attorney General Luisa Ortega recently announced that "Freedom of expression must be limited" in his country. In support of new legislation to clamp down on opposition media, Ortega explained that newspapers, radio stations, and television stations could be targeted because they have attempted to "cause panic" and "disturb social peace." President Hugo Chavez apparently supports the legislation.
The freedoms of press, speech, and assembly are all protected by the First Amendment in America. We have done so because we understand robust debate is essential to ensuring good governance. Indeed, we understand that such freedoms are unalienable rights that are beyond the realm of government regulation. The message has obviously not reached everyone.
The freedoms of press, speech, and assembly are all protected by the First Amendment in America. We have done so because we understand robust debate is essential to ensuring good governance. Indeed, we understand that such freedoms are unalienable rights that are beyond the realm of government regulation. The message has obviously not reached everyone.
Monday, October 5, 2009
The Vital Importance of Education
Noah Webster, the great contributor to American education and the lexicon, explained why education is so important to Americans:
"It is an object of vast magnitude that systems of education should be adopted and pursued which may not only diffuse a knowledge of the sciences but may implant in the minds of the American youth the principles of virtue and of liberty and inspire them with just and liberal ideas of government and with an inviolable attachment to their own country." --Noah Webster, On Education of Youth in America, 1790.
We ignore this advice at great peril.
"It is an object of vast magnitude that systems of education should be adopted and pursued which may not only diffuse a knowledge of the sciences but may implant in the minds of the American youth the principles of virtue and of liberty and inspire them with just and liberal ideas of government and with an inviolable attachment to their own country." --Noah Webster, On Education of Youth in America, 1790.
We ignore this advice at great peril.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Thinking the Unthinkable? Absolutely Necessary!
"We must learn to welcome and not fear the voices of dissent. We must dare to think about 'unthinkable things' because when things become unthinkable, thinking stops and action becomes mindless."Senator J. William Fulbright (AK)
Too often when we address issues of the day, we become entrenched and unable to think of solutions outside of what has become the dominant orthodoxy. When this happens, we stiffle innovation, suffocate flexibility, and undermine creativity. A people who are more concerned about "getting along" as opposed to getting it right will undoubtedly lapse into lethargy and a slow but sure demise.
Too often when we address issues of the day, we become entrenched and unable to think of solutions outside of what has become the dominant orthodoxy. When this happens, we stiffle innovation, suffocate flexibility, and undermine creativity. A people who are more concerned about "getting along" as opposed to getting it right will undoubtedly lapse into lethargy and a slow but sure demise.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
What Happened to Limited Government?
ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED IN THE DETROIT NEWS, CONSTITUTION DAY 2009
Two hundred twenty-two years ago, the members of the Constitutional Convention signed the federal Constitution and undertook an unparalleled revolution in the forms of government. As the heirs of this grand experiment, we too often ignore the work they accomplished at our peril.
During the past year, our nation has been transfixed by crisis, government and populism: Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, pirates, banking, mortgages, economic stimulus, health care, energy, auto companies, tea parties and town halls. The tyranny of the urgent is suffocating the eternal.
Our government rests upon the proposition that a well-informed citizenry and political leaders will guard the Constitution.
The rule of law, equality, unalienable rights, the social compact, limited government and revolution are the superstructure on which the Constitution and our country are formed.
The idea of limited government has been all but ignored. As the Declaration of Independence declares, the purpose of government is to secure the unalienable rights of individuals. After all, “it is,” Thomas Jefferson explained, “to secure our just rights that we resort to government at all ...”
Although government is necessary, it is to be strictly limited to its proper constitutional purposes.
The alternative — unlimited government— allows the government to control every aspect of our lives. The experiments with unlimited government ran amok in the 20th century — leading to Nazi Germany’s Holocaust, Mao’s starvations in China, the Soviet Union’s totalitarian liquidations and the Khmer Rouge’s genocide in Cambodia.
America chose a different path. The Constitution constrains the federal government to a few key areas, such as war and foreign affairs, interstate and international commerce, patents and copyrights, and money and weights.
Federalism provides that the states are supreme in their own sphere of influence — which is everything not specifically granted to the federal government. The states are supposed to jealously guard their authority, which helps check the power of the federal government.
Yet, with a few notable exceptions, we barely hear a whisper about limited government and federalism in policy debates. That members of Congress and others are too busy to read the bills upon which they vote is bad enough, but that no one bothers to ask whether the proposals to dramatically expand the federal government and spend trillions of dollars conforms within our system of limited government is alarming.
Reasonable people may disagree about the application of the first principles to policy issues.
However, to brush off our first principles during these tumultuous times only courts disaster.
Michael Warren is an Oakland County Circuit Court judge, a former member of the State Board of Education and a co-founder of Patriot Week. E-mail: letters@detnews.com
Patriot Week
Michael Warren and daughter Leah Warren wanted to promote a better understanding and appreciation of America’s history and civics, so this year they started a weeklong focus (Sept. 11 through today) for schools and other public and private institutions on the nation’s first principles, key historical figures, founding documents and symbols. Each celebration is tied into the state’s social studies grade-level content expectations. One school district, several schools, the University of Michigan and Cooley Law School are participating.
Two hundred twenty-two years ago, the members of the Constitutional Convention signed the federal Constitution and undertook an unparalleled revolution in the forms of government. As the heirs of this grand experiment, we too often ignore the work they accomplished at our peril.
During the past year, our nation has been transfixed by crisis, government and populism: Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, pirates, banking, mortgages, economic stimulus, health care, energy, auto companies, tea parties and town halls. The tyranny of the urgent is suffocating the eternal.
Our government rests upon the proposition that a well-informed citizenry and political leaders will guard the Constitution.
The rule of law, equality, unalienable rights, the social compact, limited government and revolution are the superstructure on which the Constitution and our country are formed.
The idea of limited government has been all but ignored. As the Declaration of Independence declares, the purpose of government is to secure the unalienable rights of individuals. After all, “it is,” Thomas Jefferson explained, “to secure our just rights that we resort to government at all ...”
Although government is necessary, it is to be strictly limited to its proper constitutional purposes.
The alternative — unlimited government— allows the government to control every aspect of our lives. The experiments with unlimited government ran amok in the 20th century — leading to Nazi Germany’s Holocaust, Mao’s starvations in China, the Soviet Union’s totalitarian liquidations and the Khmer Rouge’s genocide in Cambodia.
America chose a different path. The Constitution constrains the federal government to a few key areas, such as war and foreign affairs, interstate and international commerce, patents and copyrights, and money and weights.
Federalism provides that the states are supreme in their own sphere of influence — which is everything not specifically granted to the federal government. The states are supposed to jealously guard their authority, which helps check the power of the federal government.
Yet, with a few notable exceptions, we barely hear a whisper about limited government and federalism in policy debates. That members of Congress and others are too busy to read the bills upon which they vote is bad enough, but that no one bothers to ask whether the proposals to dramatically expand the federal government and spend trillions of dollars conforms within our system of limited government is alarming.
Reasonable people may disagree about the application of the first principles to policy issues.
However, to brush off our first principles during these tumultuous times only courts disaster.
Michael Warren is an Oakland County Circuit Court judge, a former member of the State Board of Education and a co-founder of Patriot Week. E-mail: letters@detnews.com
Patriot Week
Michael Warren and daughter Leah Warren wanted to promote a better understanding and appreciation of America’s history and civics, so this year they started a weeklong focus (Sept. 11 through today) for schools and other public and private institutions on the nation’s first principles, key historical figures, founding documents and symbols. Each celebration is tied into the state’s social studies grade-level content expectations. One school district, several schools, the University of Michigan and Cooley Law School are participating.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Hats Off to the Suffragists and Gender Equality
Patriot Week yesterday honored the First Principle of gender equality, suffragists Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, the 1848 Seneca Falls Statement, the 19th Amendment (granting women suffrage), and the Suffragist Flag.
When America declared independence and explained that “all men are created equal,” we left out better half of our people. Not only were women prohibited from voting, they had nearly no legal rights. However, suffragists and women rights’ activists drew upon the principles of equality, unalienable rights, and the Social Compact to point out that unless women were enfranchised and granted equal civil and political rights, that the idea of equality would be mockery.
After decades of struggle, the 19th Amendment was adopted on August 26, 1920. Although the struggle for gender equality has not yet ended, there have been tremendous strides across the economic, political, and cultural arenas.
Unfortunately, the struggle for gender equality has hardly begun in other areas of the world – such as Saudi Arabia and Sudan (where a women was recently imprisoned for wearing pants, and others are lashed for the same offense). Hopefully America’s beacon of light will enlighten the darker realms of the world.
For more on our First Principles and Patriot Week, visit http://www.patriotweek.com/ and http://www.americassurvivalguide.com/.
When America declared independence and explained that “all men are created equal,” we left out better half of our people. Not only were women prohibited from voting, they had nearly no legal rights. However, suffragists and women rights’ activists drew upon the principles of equality, unalienable rights, and the Social Compact to point out that unless women were enfranchised and granted equal civil and political rights, that the idea of equality would be mockery.
After decades of struggle, the 19th Amendment was adopted on August 26, 1920. Although the struggle for gender equality has not yet ended, there have been tremendous strides across the economic, political, and cultural arenas.
Unfortunately, the struggle for gender equality has hardly begun in other areas of the world – such as Saudi Arabia and Sudan (where a women was recently imprisoned for wearing pants, and others are lashed for the same offense). Hopefully America’s beacon of light will enlighten the darker realms of the world.
For more on our First Principles and Patriot Week, visit http://www.patriotweek.com/ and http://www.americassurvivalguide.com/.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
