Memories of the 28th Century

Here in the U.S.A. there are specific, written boundaries on the powers of the central government, but the constitutional limits have not been honored in observation. The extensions of the U.S. government have taken many forms, and the extension has been largely accidental or collateral damage, as the feds decided to take control of one thing it entailed other matters also. In most countries the limits of governmental authority are not as clear, but even with clear, explicit limits to its range of authority, the U.S. government has found ways to extend into matters that are outside its purview.

Maybe the government people think that the U.S. should be more like other countries. It wouldn’t the only time that the U.S. government has done things just to fit in; the same was true of civil forfeiture. Civil forfeiture is banned by the U.S. constitution, but the feds and all but one state enacted laws that allow civil forfeiture. Imagine the government saying to itself, “Putin changes his constitution anytime he wants to, so why shouldn’t we?”

There isn’t any provision for the government requiring citizens to buy medical insurance, but that didn’t stop congress and the president from requiring exactly that, and the Supreme Court also neglected to notice that the federal government didn’t have that power.

In the last couple of decades the feds have insinuated themselves into public education, even though that never was within federal authority, and it had been exclusively a matter for the states, but everyone ignored legality, and we have had education deteriorating in direct proportion to the involvement of the feds. Maybe someone should point out the ancient truism that whenever government gets involved in something that it deteriorates.

While part of the banking system is under federal regulation, housing and urban development are not among the federal powers. Fortunately, the federal involvement in urban development has been minimal. But that isn't the case in human welfare, a field in which federal involvement has been increasing for decades. What was a reasonably straightforward matter fifty years ago is a swamp of different agencies with their peculiar regulations and requirements. It would be easier and cheaper to simply cut the feds out and have the states adjust their agencies and requirements and so on to local conditions.

It wasn’t that long ago when something had to cross state lines before the feds would get involved. That kept them from doing anything about industrial pollution, except for a few some multi-state situations, especially navigable waterways, which were a federal concern without question. Then they added tributaries of navigable waterways. Then someone pointed out that air pollution was interstate, and so on. The feds went after nearly all water pollution and air pollution. While that was an extension of federal power into something that was not among its actual authority, it was not completely unreasonable, and the things that the feds were trying to get cleaned were undoubted pollutants. A few months ago the EPA announced that it would also regulation CO2 being put into the atmosphere, which is rather odd, because CO2 is not a pollutant, and it is the natural gas exhaled by all animals. In effect, the EPA may have claimed the power to regulate how much you and I breathe.

There are also some older extensions of federal power that must be reversed. The regulations on drugs and alcohol come to mind. There is nothing in the constitution giving the feds power to ban such things; although they probably can be taxed when they enter interstates trade, but the taxes would have to be reasonable, or the feds would be taking the livelihoods of people, which they did.

If I neglected your favorite over-extension of government, then let me know. There are so many, that it's difficult to give all of them the treatment that they deserve. Speaking of treatment, it is difficult to protest this problem in any but the most polite manners, but it is always good to be polite. It is difficult to bring suit unless you have been personally harmed. Being too creative in finding harm may not do much good, because judges are paid by government. The Declaration of Independence does assert that the right to overthrow the government belongs to every citizen, but actually putting that into effect would be difficult and dangerous, so you would be better r off not even mentioning that.