Five controversial (and award-winning) ideas for proactive conservative evolution

Like this whirlpool galaxy from a Hubble image seems to get power sipohed away, so the states must siphon back power from the federal government.At National Review, Jonah Goldberg notes an observation by Friedrich Hayek: “It has . . . invariably been the fate of conservatism to be dragged along a path not of its own choosing.”

Whether it’s the fiscal cliff negotiations, entitlement spending, or any other form of government expansion, the progressive agenda steams ahead, dragging and ripping from the ground the constitutional and conservative roots of this country. Conservatives never win on core principles. Our successes only slow the rate of acceleration toward leftist domination.

Goldberg highlights federalism, where each individual state would regain the powers our constitution assigned it, as the path to proactive conservative re-emergence. We agree with the merits of federalism. However, the deck is stacked against that prospect. The federal government has too much leverage over the states.

So what’s the roadmap for returning to federalism?

We’ve already written about the need for conservatives to infiltrate pop culture and proactively set our own memes as we engage in the campaign to reassert the positive moral values and economic advantages of conservative ideas. Fertilizing the cultural grounds is necessary for conservative seeds to flourish.

What about the political side?

Conservatives tend to fight political battles on a policy-by-policy basis, while Progressives push to radically alter the relationship between citizen and state through laws such as the PPACA (Obamacare). Conservatives need to start playing that same long game.

In an entry to the National Review Institute’s 2010 policy contest, I made a series of recommendations, which received honorable mention as a finalist in the competition. These five ideas are bold, long term solutions (including some that libertarians have championed) that would get our government more in line with the Founders’ vision.

Agree? Disagree? We’d love to hear from you. Here’s the list:  Read more of this post

The numbers are in: People want federalism.

Diagram of US Federal Government and American ...People living in California don’t have the same needs or expectations of government as people living in Alabama.  People living in New York City may want higher standards for gun ownership, while a farmer in Oklahoma feels it’s an unnecessary intrusion.  Citizens in Maryland may want restaurants obligated to post the calorie count on the menu, while someone in North Dakota may just want to enjoy a doughnut without feeling guilty.  When the federal government overreaches and forces one-size-fits-all government on the people, this is the result:

Today, just one in three has a favorable view of the federal government — the lowest level in 15 years, according to a Pew survey. The majority of Americans remain satisfied with their local and state governments — 61 percent and 52 percent, respectively — but only 33 percent feel likewise about the federal government.

In rare moments, such as the aftermath of 9/11, we rally together and are receptive of a common way forward:

In 2002, nearly double that figure, 64 percent viewed the federal government favorably, and Americans held their local and state governments in similar esteem, at 67 percent and 62 percent, respectively.

Otherwise, this country is made up of 300 million individuals, each with their own lives and interests.  Certain things can only be handled at the national level, such as national security or a uniform system of weights and measures (i.e. the enumerated powers granted to the federal government by the Constitution).  All other powers should be relegated to the states.  Dissatisfaction is sure to follow when a change in presidential administration means everyone in the country is forced to live like Kentuckians for four years, then New Yorkers the next four, then Alaskans after that.  A meat eating, NRA badge-carrying taxidermist may like his vegetarian, yoga-teacher neighbor, but neither one wants to be obligated by force of law to live like the other. States should have the same choice to coexist while still maintaining autonomy.  Americans will pull together when we have to, but otherwise we just want the freedom to live our own lives as we see fit.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 39 other followers

%d bloggers like this: