What Do Citizens Owe Government?
by
James Bovard
by James Bovard
DIGG THIS
When politicians
are not promising new benefits to citizens, they continually remind
citizens what they owe the government. From their first years in
government schools, children are indoctrinated with the notion that
government provides them some grandiose benefit. This seed often
produces a harvest of servility in later life.
But few people
stop and try to accurately calculate this supposed debt. What does
the citizen owe the state? Or, more accurately, what does the citizen
owe the politicians and bureaucrats who claim to represent and embody
the state?
Every extension
of the welfare state results, directly or indirectly, in politicians
and bureaucrats feeling entitled to demand more obedience from people.
What does the government do for citizens that citizens could not
do as well or better for themselves? This is the first question
that must be answered before gauging how much obedience people might
owe a government. Insofar as government busies itself doing things
worse for the citizen than he could have done himself, the citizen
is justified in viewing government as a nuisance and a poacher.
In the vast
majority of cases, governments possess only what they first seize
from private citizens. How can citizens owe government when practically
everything the government has it first took from them? The fact
that people are forced to pay for certain goods and services indirectly,
by taxation, cannot create an ineradicable debt to the people who
seized their paychecks. People who are government dependents have
a debt not so much to the government itself, but to their fellow
citizens who earn the money the government seizes and then renders
to them.
Some statists
insist that the citizen should be grateful for such government services
as mail delivery. Yet, the government is more vigilant in attacking
private threats to its monopoly over first-class mail delivery than
in expediting the mail. First-class mail service is significantly
slower than it was 40 years ago, in part because of an intentional
policy of reducing next-day mail deliveries. In areas in which the
postal service competes directly with private companies, such as
overnight express mail and parcel post, the government has been
whupped shamelessly. Citizens cannot be indebted to the government
for mail service when it is federal restrictions that prohibit a
far wider array of private services.
Public schools
Others will
insist that people are indebted to government for public schools.
But the parents of most children pay more in taxes than government
spends educating their kids. Besides, despite sharp increases in
government spending for education in the last 15 years, American
high-school students score at the rock bottom in math and science
compared with students in other countries.
The government
routinely effectively confiscates parents money to pay for
schools and then fails to educate their kids, yet faces no liability
for its de facto breach of implied contract. An investigation by
the New Jersey State Department of Education concluded, The
Newark School District has been at best flagrantly delinquent and
at worst deceptive in discharging its obligations to the children
enrolled in public schools.
Public high
schools graduate an estimated 700,000 functionally illiterate teenagers
each year. Regardless of how badly school officials fail to serve
students, parents are left no recourse but to file complaints with
the same unresponsive bureaucracy. As law professor Judith Berliner
Cohen observed,
No plaintiff
to date has been able to convince a court that a school owes him
or her any more than a chair in a classroom. ... Insofar
as they have been deluded into believing that it is
not necessary to find alternate means of education, the students
are arguably worse off than they otherwise would have been.
Without quasi-monopoly public schools, a far more extensive network
of private schools would be available schools that would
be responsive to parents desire for their children to learn.
The rapid spread of the home-schooling movement (whose students
consistently outscore public-school students on standardized tests)
vivifies how parents can do better on their own.
Government-provided
roads
Nor are citizens
indebted to government for providing goods such as roads. Despite
heavy federal taxes levied on gas buyers, politicians are allowing
more and more of the Interstate Highway System to deteriorate to
Third World road conditions. Roughly three-fifths of all interstate
highways are in poor or mediocre condition, according to the Federal
Highway Administration. Drivers pay more than $140 billion in gas
taxes each year, but only about half of that money is actually spent
on maintaining and building roads; the rest is spent on other political
wish lists.
Roads are a
good example of the contempt that government shows for citizens
in the services it forces them to finance. As road expert and author
Gabriel Roth observed, U.S. roads suffer from the typical
command economy characteristics: poor maintenance, congestion, and
insensitivity to consumer needs. Because traffic jams cost
government employees nothing, government agencies scorn sound traffic-control
measures. Federal Highway Administration traffic-safety engineers
Samuel Tignor and Davey Warren concluded in a 1990 study that most
speed zones were posted 15 m.p.h. below the maximum safe speed;
that, on average, speed limits are set too low to be accepted as
reasonable by most drivers, and that the posted speeds make violators
out of motorists who drive reasonably and safely. Politicians
profit from unnecessarily low speed limits because of the increase
in the number of drivers eligible for speeding tickets. Accidents
and traffic jams result from policemens fixation on ticketing
drivers who pose no threat to public safety.
Will Rogers
suggested long ago, The way to deal with traffic congestion
is to have business provide the roads and government the cars.
But though this hasnt been done, politicians still expect
thanks from citizens, despite potholes as far as the eye can see.
Police protection
Do citizens
owe a vast debt to the state for keeping the peace? Many big-city
police departments have effectively abandoned serious efforts to
solve robberies and other cases of nonlethal violence; the District
of Columbia police, for instance, make arrests in fewer than 10
percent of burglaries and robberies. But D.C. police have set records
for arresting citizens detected drinking alcohol on their front
porches. They have also been valiant in cracking down on drivers
with unfastened seatbelts.
Insofar as
government prohibits people from owning or carrying weapons for
self-defense, it is scant consolation that a policeman arrives after
the crime to chalk off the body. There are more than twice as many
private security guards as uniformed policemen in the United States.
More citizens than ever before are living in gated communities or
relying on home alarm systems. Private citizens use guns to defend
themselves more than 2 million times a year, according to Florida
State University criminologist Gary Kleck. After comparing the effects
of more people carrying guns with other popular reforms, economist
John Lott concluded that of all the methods studied so far
by economists, the carrying of concealed handguns appears to be
the most cost-effective method for reducing crime.
Military
defense
The one area
in which it is most plausible that government could provide a unique
service is national defense. However, if a government busies itself
making enemies, and then praises itself for pledging to protect
citizens from the enemies it makes, there is less than a transcendent
benefit. The war in Iraq will very likely cost Americans more than
a trillion dollars a high price for Bushs May 1, 2003,
victory strut aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln.
What
have politicians given to the citizenry that they did not originally
take from them? This is the bottom line that must permeate all thinking
about the goods or services that government
provides to the citizenry. In reality, in the vast majority
of cases, politicians give back far less in value than they take.
The more the government takes, the less the citizen owes to the
government.
Insofar as
the government takes from the citizen more than it renders to the
citizen, the citizen owes the state the same contempt that he would
have for any other con artist.
Citizens cannot
be indebted to the state for any political promise that the government
fails to fulfill just as any citizens obligation to
fulfill a private contract is dissolved by the other partys
failure to fulfill his obligations. Nor can people owe obedience
to government for any activity that the people could have done better
themselves.
It
is the government that owes obedience to the citizens, rather than
citizens who owe obedience to the government. But the bigger government
becomes, the more difficult it is to make it heel.
August
7, 2007
James Bovard
[send him mail] is the author
of the just-released Attention
Deficit Democracy, The
Bush Betrayal, and Terrorism
& Tyranny: Trampling Freedom, Justice, and Peace to Rid the
World of Evil. He serves as a policy advisor for The
Future of Freedom Foundation. Visit his
website.
Copyright
© 2007 The Future of Freedom Foundation
James
Bovard Archives
|