The Administrative State

When the U.S. Constitution was drafted it was specifically calculated to make sure that government’s power would remain limited. The concern of the Founding Fathers was the preservation of naturally endowed rights that could only be realized with minimal government intrusion. A new movement, starting with 19^th century progressives through 21^st century liberals, suggests s that the concern of our Founding Fathers about the rise of tyrannical government is outdated. “Such fears,” progressives would say, “even if well-founded in the early days of the republic, no longer appl[y] to the modern era” (Pestritto, 2008, p. 208). The progressive ideologists suggest that government’s responsibility is to the individual and “that the nation’s responsibility to care for its citizens in need calls for more, not less, government power, authority, and spending.” (Messmore, 2008, p. 243). The limited government envisioned by our Founders, however, is not outdated, and progressive ideals are fundamentally at odds with those — that gave rise to our Constitution (Pestritto, 2008, p. 203)

The expansion of the federal government is tied to the expansion of the Administrative functions of government which infringes upon personal liberties. The administrative state, as we know it today, came to exist through the realization of the progressive ideology. This ideology suggests “it [is] far better and more efficient for a professional class of experts, instead of a multiplicity of politicians with narrow, competing interests, to handle the complex business of the modern state.” (Pestritto, 2008, p. 210) The Founders view, however, was that addressing such dilemmas should be left to elected politicians who have the “wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of the society.” (West & Schambra, 2008, p. 253).

The dilemmas that face the American people, Woodrow Wilson maintains, are best handled by experts trained in the various fields in which those dilemmas arise. These administrators would and should be free of political control because “[T]heir salary and tenure would take care of any self-interested inclinations that might corrupt their decision making, liberating them to focus solely on truth and the good of the public as a whole.” (Pestritto, 2008, p. 215) This also, however, leaves them with little accountability as there is no constituency to whom they are accountable. In considering the broad reach of such administrative functions one has only to consider the EPA’s regulation capping water usage in our toilets to 1.6 lpf, “The long arm of the federal government now controls our commodes. (Rauchut, 2008)

Yet another problem with the administrative state is its ability to legislate on the fly, an increased flexibility being required to meet the unique needs of society as they arise. An example of this the SEC’s ruling against Chenery Corporation, having no founding in fact but “allowing rule-of-law to take a backseat to social expediency” (Pestritto, 2008, p. 204) The rules per se’ are not established firmly allowing the administrator to do what is best for society. This goes contrary to the very ideals of the constitution it being important that people “may know their duty, and be safe and secure within the limits of the law, and the rulers too kept within their bounds.” In this case, however, the people can never know the limits to which they must adhere and the rulers are under no obligation.

Government expansion encompasses meeting the welfare needs of individuals, releasing civil society from its obligation to do what they should do and would do more effectively. This welfare program is fueled by tax payer dollars and is bereft of any sense of virtue that might otherwise be attached. “In a free society,” says Roger Pilon “people are free to be virtuous – or not. Indeed, only when virtuous acts are voluntary, can they be called virtuous.” (Pilon, 2008, p. 262) As the needs of the welfare state continues, the appropriation of personal property continues. As this responsibility reverts to where it original was and always should have been, namely family, churches, and other civic organizations, government is allowed to shrink and the burden on the individual is relieved. More to the point, the burden of providing for another’s welfare becomes the privilege to give.

The intent of the Progressive movement is to introduce a utopia or as close to a utopia as possible to the United States. Science and technology are to this state of living what the administrator is to the progressive’s big government. They have a tremendous amount of faith placed in them. Perhaps more than should be expected. It’s the idea that “nothing is impossible for a government that wants the good of its citizens.” (Kristol, 2008, p. 297) What such utopian-minded people fail to acknowledge, however that such “good” comes from the redistribution of wealth from those who have worked for it, to those who have not for whatever reason. Therefore, the idea is only good to the have- not’s.

The intent of limited government, as espoused by the framers of our Constitution, is freedom from the tyranny of a monarchy. A monarchy is only as good as the ruler. Even then, the ruler tends to live outside the generally accepted norms of behavior as described by Machiavelli in The Prince (Machiavelli, 2008) At the other end of the spectrum is protection from loss of all individualism and freedom through a sort of communism as described by Plato in his curiously entitled The Republic. (Plato, 2008). Here in the constitutionally based rule of law is found freedom from either kind of tyranny, that of one man or that of the society. As government grows, however, and takes on more of the responsibility that rightly belongs with civil society the squeeze is placed upon individual liberties.

Bibliography

Kristol, I. (2008). Utopianism, Ancient and Modern. Kirkpatrick Signature Series Reader , 293-299.

Locke, J. (2008). From The Second Treatise On Government (1690). Kirkpatrick Signature Series Reader , 272-275.

Machiavelli, N. (2008). The Prince. Kirkpatrick Signature Series Reader , 225-234.

Messmore, R. (2008). A Moral Case Against Big Government: How Government Shapes the Character, Vision & Virtue of Citizens. Kirkpatrick Signature Series Reader , 235-246.

Pestritto, R. J. (2008). The Birth of the Administrative State: Where it Came From & What it Means for Limited Government. Kirkpatrick Signature Series Reader , 203-218.

Pilon, R. (2008). The Purpose & Limits of Government. Kirkpatrick Signature Series Reader , 259-271.

Plato. (2008). The Republic Book 5. Kirkpatrick Signature Series Reader , 277-289.

Rauchut, E. A. (2008). American Vision and Values: A Companion to the Kirpatrick Signature Series. Omaha: Bellevue University Press.

West, T., & Schambra, W. (2008). Progressive Movement & The Transformation of American Politics. Kirkpatrick Signature Series Reader , 247-258.