The Federalist Solution

[4est_4est_Gump]

By Jonah Goldberg
March 21, 2012 12:00 A.M.

...

Federalism — the process whereby you push most political questions to the lowest democratic level possible — has been ripe on the right for years now. It even had a champion in Texas governor Rick Perry, and Ron Paul still carries that torch.

The main advantage of federalism is more fundamental than the “laboratories of democracy” idea. Federalism is simply the best political system ever conceived of for maximizing human happiness. A one-size-fits-all policy imposed at the national level has the potential to make very large numbers of citizens unhappy, even if it was arrived at democratically. In a pure democracy, I always say, 51 percent of the people can vote to pee in the cornflakes of 49 percent of the people.

Pushing government decisions down to the lowest democratic level possible — while protecting basic civil rights — guarantees that more people will have a say in how they live their lives. Not only does that mean more people will be happy, but the moral legitimacy of political decisions will be greater.

The problem for conservative and libertarian federalists is that whenever we talk about federalism, the Left hears “states’ rights” — which is then immediately, and unfairly, translated into, “Bring back Bull Connor.”

But that may be changing. In an essay for the spring issue of Democracy: A Journal of Ideas, Yale law professor Heather K. Gerken offers the case for “A New Progressive Federalism.”

Gerken’s chief concern is how to empower “minorities and dissenters.” Not surprisingly, she defines such people in almost purely left-wing terms of race and sexual orientation. Still, she makes the very compelling point that the current understanding of diversity — having minority members as tokens of inclusion — pretty much guarantees that racial minorities will always be political minorities as well.

“While the diversity paradigm guarantees racial minorities a vote or voice on every decision-making body, it also ensures that they will be the political losers on any issue on which people divide along racial lines,” Gerken writes. “Racial minorities are thus destined to be the junior partner or dissenting gadfly in the democratic process. So much for dignity.”

Allowing local majorities to have their way, Gerken continues, “turns the tables. It allows the usual winners to lose and the usual losers to win. It gives racial minorities the chance to shed the role of influencer or gadfly and stand in the shoes of the majority.”

She’s right, and not just about her favored groups. For instance, Mormons (not a group Gerken highlights) are a national minority. But they are a Utah majority. Hence, Utah takes on Mormon characteristics. It’s no theocracy, but it is more representative and distinctive. In areas where Latinos or blacks are the majority, what’s so terrible about having institutions that reflect their values?

And federalism would let them all live by their mistakes as well. In San Francisco, which Gerken touts as a haven for “dissenters,” they translate their values into law. I think much of what passes for wise policy in San Francisco is idiotic, but it bothers me less than it would if Nancy Pelosi succeeded in making all of America like San Francisco.

I don’t see eye to eye with Gerken on everything, and I suspect she would be reluctant to push the welfare state downward. (Public employees in Galveston, Texas, for instance, are not part of the Social Security system.)

Still, I’m delighted her essay has received respectful treatment from the Left. A Left-Right federalist compromise would make America a happier, freer, more prosperous and interesting country. It would also dethrone those in both parties who think they know what’s best for more than 300 million Americans.

 

[off2bed]

I finally figured out why American lefties use (or, used) the word "liberal." They want complete liberty for government. Freedom for the Federal government to do anything they please. No boundaries, no limits. Total freedom.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I finally figured out why American lefties use (or, used) the word "liberal." They want complete liberty for government. Freedom for the Federal government to do anything they please. No boundaries, no limits. Total freedom.

^^^^Honor Graduate of his homeskool. Majored in gummint, minored in race relations.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I finally figured out why American lefties use (or, used) the word "liberal." They want complete liberty for government. Freedom for the Federal government to do anything they please. No boundaries, no limits. Total freedom.

They co-opted then name when it meant educated by the Enlightenment and then pulled it up over themselves as a comforter to hide the Romanticist Socialist bed they eventually lied down in...

That's why Liberals had to start calling themselves Libertarians.

 

[JohnnySavage]

They co-opted then name when it meant educated by the Enlightenment and then pulled it up over themselves as a comforter to hide the Romanticist Socialist bed they eventually lied down in...

That's why Liberals had to start calling themselves Libertarians.

You could be describing conservatives here. Today's "Conservatives" are anything but conservative.

 

[off2bed]

They co-opted then name when it meant educated by the Enlightenment and then pulled it up over themselves as a comforter to hide the Romanticist Socialist bed they eventually lied down in...

That's why Liberals had to start calling themselves Libertarians.

Liberal sheets to lie on
Liberal sheets to cry on
Still they're not happy, don't you see.

Big long Cadillacs,
Chevy Volts with battery packs
Still, I want you to set me free...

 

[off2bed]

You could be describing conservatives here. Today's "Conservatives" are anything but conservative.

Taken literally, conservative means preserving the status-quo. Today's status-quo is very liberal, so you're right that if you want to conserve the status-quo you're a liberal. Like George W. Bush.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

You could be describing conservatives here. Today's "Conservatives" are anything but conservative.

Conservatives seem to be mixed-market types.

That makes them the Liberals natural ally...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Liberal sheets to lie on
Liberal sheets to cry on
Still they're not happy, don't you see.

Big long Cadillacs,
Chevy Volts with battery packs
Still, I want you to set me free...

And Little Ricky Santorum sings...

"Oh Lord, won't you buy me, a Mercedes_Benz..."

 

[JohnnySavage]

Conservatives seem to be mixed-market types.

That makes them the Liberals natural ally...

The 'liberals' of today want to take my money and give it to someone else. The 'conservatives' of today want to take my money and give it to the government to keep an eye on me. I'd like to just be left alone.

 

[unregistered]

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

The 'liberals' of today want to take my money and give it to someone else. The 'conservatives' of today want to take my money and give it to the government to keep an eye on me. I'd like to just be left alone.

I can't tell where one stops and the other begins.


*spit*

 

[cjh]

The government boot applied liberally on the back of our necks.

Exactly. Like when they pass laws stifling a doctor's speech.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Conservatives seem to be mixed-market types.

That makes them the Liberals natural ally...

I did use an axe to pound stakes in the ground the other day; I guess thats what you mean by mixed-market.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I did use an axe to pound stakes in the ground the other day; I guess thats what you mean by mixed-market.

I have an axe (to grind) buy I almost always use the maul (impact, sudden stop, URRAH!)...

 

[unregistered]

 

[cjh]

Then balancing it out by handing them the authority to interrogate citizens about the presence of guns in their households, so they can become part of the national government's citizen surveillance system.

Physicians are deputized?!?!

 

[Wok]

Physicians are deputized?!?!

Yes.

Now stop hating America.

 

[unregistered]

 

[RobDownSouth]

Then balancing it out by handing them the authority to interrogate citizens about the presence of guns in their households, so they can become part of the national government's citizen surveillance system.

^^^^paranoid little bitch.

 

[Liar]

Federalism is not a good word to describe this. Connotes to and allows for totalitarian rule at te first non federal level. Why not just call it decentalization?

By the way if 49% can't stop their cereal from being pissed in on a national level, what makes that better locally? The solution seems to be homogenous local communities instead of the diversity ideal that's a prevalent Liberal factor.

Sooo.... Sharia City, anyone?

 

[cjh]

Appointed as informers.

Are they forced to ask about guns?

Why wouldn't the free market solve the problem?

Couldn't a physician simply advertise that he is a member of the NRA and solve the problem?

Seems like you're quite happy to polish the Jackboot so long as it serves your ends.

 

[cjh]

Yes.

Now stop hating America.

May Day is just around the corner!

 

[RobDownSouth]

Seems like you're quite happy to polish the Jackboot so long as it serves your ends.

Vetty is a classic authoritarian-follower. After 20 Republican debates, he's still uncertain who he'll vote for in a primary, but he'll march proudly in lockstep with his brethren behind the candidate selected for him to run against Obama.

 

[Adre]

Vetty is a classic authoritarian-follower. After 20 Republican debates, he's still uncertain who he'll vote for in a primary, but he'll march proudly in lockstep with his brethren behind the candidate selected for him to run against Obama.

Looks like Veggieman will have to hold his nose and vote for Mittney Obamalite. This should be fun.