President Trump has put forth his proposed budget, and, like vultures preparing for their prey, the media are sharpening their talons. And so it begins: Media such as CNN, The New Yorker, and CNBC are now proclaiming that Armageddon is at hand for every social service, arts, housing, and community programs for the poor, underserved, and needy in our country. What kind of federal government, they bemoan, is it that does not feed hungry schoolchildren or impoverished elderly, promote the arts for inner-city schoolchildren, or provide services to our malfunctioning neighborhoods?
A Federal Government That Truly Cares
My answer: A good and honest one. A federal government that truly cares about its citizens and their hearts, souls, and treasure does not pretend that it can perform these services better than local neighbors can, nor does it take these advantages and opportunities away from them.
This is more than a political essay. This is the recognition of two eternal truths: 1) A central governmental behemoth can never help as effectively as local, interested neighbors can. 2) More importantly for our spiritual lives, when the government does the work that we the people should be doing, we tend to no longer see it as our calling.
The federal government can do a few things better than we locals can. It can run national enterprises which are too large in scope or complexity for local entities to operate. Think of the post office, treasury, the military, international relations, or interstate travel. No matter how well intended, individual citizens or local neighborhood groups just can’t manage those operations.
But in defining the concept of federalism, James Madison, considered by many “the Father of the Constitution”, made clear that the vast majority of responsibilities rest with local entities. In The Federalist Papers 45, he stated clearly: “The powers delegated … to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.”
Subsidiarity and the Federal Government
Like attempting to cut hair with an ax, the federal government is “all thumbs” when it comes to administering local needs. Only we know our neighbors, our communities, our fellow citizens well enough to understand the subtle nuances of the problems each of us faces locally. Federal government involvement typically results in large and wasteful duplication of tasks, miscommunication, mismanagement, bloated budgets, and, not surprisingly, general failure to solve the problem or solve it well.
Realistically, only we can truly “take care of our own.” Only we can truly understand the needs of our neighbors and ourselves well enough to identify the source of problems and formulate effective local solutions. And as Catholic Christians, this is precisely what we are called to do.
The principle of subsidiarity, defined in Section 185 of the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, is the civic outgrowth of St. Paul’s portrayal of the Church as the Body of Christ in which we all fulfill a particular purpose. When we synergize our unique gifts and talents for a single purpose, we can accomplish much more than we can individually and perform much more effectively and justly. This is the positive sense of subsidiarity, discussed in Section 186. The negative implications, however, are just as important. These implications “require the State to refrain from anything that would de facto restrict the existential space of smaller essential cells of society. Their initiative, freedom, and responsibility must not be supplanted.”
Taxes and Works of Mercy
When we step back and allow a big central government to do the tasks that we were meant to do, thoughts about works of mercy toward our fellow man — the heart of our existence as Catholics and Christians (and devout Jews and Muslims, by the way) — is at risk of being pushed aside and justified merely by signing our 1040 each April.
The hungry family at school? My taxes paid for Federally-funded free breakfast and lunch at school.
The sick elderly neighbor who lives alone? My taxes paid for his Medicaid, Medicare, medicine, and visiting nurse.
The ill-educated child at the central-city public school? The Federal Department of Education uses my tax money to test, administer, and implement best practices.
The disabled co-worker? The ADA, funded by my tax dollars, will take care of making sure everything is accessible.
The homeless man by the highway? My taxes have paid for public housing that he could use.
A Poor Substitute of Ourselves
We pump our tax money into more programs, greater assistance, larger infrastructures, and wear the fake virtue of the Pharisees while absolving ourselves from giving our more powerful hearts, spirits, and talents in subsidiarity with one another. We throw our laundered money at people and treat them as problems to be solved rather than fellow humans to be nourished, healed, inspired, noticed, and, most importantly, loved by the unique hearts each of us possesses. In the end, sadly, we pay an extravagant ransom, both monetarily and spiritually, for a poor substitute of ourselves.
Ultimately, loving our neighbors as ourselves is not the Federal Government’s responsibility. It’s ours because only we can truly love as God loved us and it is what He commanded us to do. It’s time to stop passing the buck to the Federal government and bring our responsibilities to one another back to our hometowns, and into our own hearts, where they belong.
22 thoughts on “Should the Federal Government be “Heartless, Soulless, and Cheap”?”
There are two types of people who embrace “Big Government”:
1. People who trust Washington more than their neighbors, such as San Francisco conservatives and Texas liberals.
2. Busybodies who think they know best for everyone. These are conservatives who want to dictate law enforcement priorities to cities on the other side of the country and liberals who want to dictate curricula to local small town school boards.
Also: women, minorities (especially African Americans) and other historically oppressed groups (gay people, the disabled). They are perfectly aware that without the federal government’s involvement, sometimes expressed via the iron fist of military action, we would still have slavery, women as chattel, and a long list of unjust discriminations.
I respectfully disagree. Historically the states have been the first to grant equal rights to minorities and women in their constitutions and laws. My state, Ohio, was part of the Northwest Ordinance which banned slavery in the late 1700’s in our states covered by the Ordinance. States took the lead in providing the right for women to vote. Yes the 14th amendment was helpful but it was the states that promoted abolition. All great civil rights initiatives started at the grassroots level, moving state by state.
A black person from the South would respectfully disagree. In her case, equality only could be accomplished by a federal army invading her state in 1863 and slaughtering thousands of (mostly) innocent people.
A strong federal government can cut both ways. Just a few years before the Civil War, the federal government insisted that Homer Plessy was a slave in Missouri, not a free man in Illinois. The Fugitive Slave Act was federal law and incredibly unpopular in the free states.
The same people who are in favor of cutting lunches to poor kids at the federal level are also in favor of cutting lunches to poor kids at the state level.
I suppose you’re in favor of cutting taxes for the rich, too.
Can you give me statistics to back that up?
I’m in favor of getting to the root of the problem. Why does the child need a free lunch? That requires personal, local interaction and that is the theme of this article.
Thanks for writing.
See my response to James below.
The reason the federal government got involved in the first place is because state and local governments were dropping the ball. Usually when the states take over again, they drop the ball again.
I refer you to the 1968 CBS News special, “Hunger in America.” The sight of wrinkly starving babies — who sometimes weighed less at one year than they did *at birth* — in our own country has always stayed with me. And this was in rural Virginia. Hunger like this was endemic across the country. It still is far too prevalent, but federal aid, and the imposition of federal standards, are a necessity. And of course you agree with me that the federal government has to be in charge of environmental matters, air and water pollution, and addressing climate change. But look at the deep cuts Trump wants to make in the EPA.
Do you believe that state and local governments will let poor children go hungry?
If so, do you believe that YOUR state and local government would let poor children go hungry? Or is it only THOSE people’s government that you are worried about?
All you have to do is google “food stamps”, “state cuts”, and you will see that invariably it is Republicans — who dislike federal involvement — in support, and Democrats — who tend to be in favor of federal involvement — trying to stop the state cuts. On the rare occasions a Republican governor is trying to save aid for the poor, it is with the support of Democrats and against the opposition of his fellow Republicans.
Again I would like to see facts and clear data in support of your claims.
In addition, I would also suggest that you read about Homeboy Industries, started by Fr Greg Boyle SJ as a completely local, initially entirely voluntary, and charitable undertaking to decrease gang violence and provide employment for former gang members in LA. Its success has been greater than any government initiative because it is locally-based and its employees and volunteers are the past gang members themselves. These are the kinds of efforts that work. See their website for articles and information. I will follow with citations.
http://articles.latimes.com/2014/jan/26/local/la-me-0126-lopez-homeboy-20140126
Please see this article regarding their successes with very little government funding.
That is indeed inspiring but to expect local undertakings like that to spring up everywhere is not realistic.
Why? If we say that we believe in helping our neighbor, why can’t we all act like Fr Greg Boyle? Together, we could accomplish anything!
That would be nice but you understand a lot of people (many of whom are in power) will do everything possible to thwart you?
Just as they tried to thwart the One we claim to follow. But with His grace, all things are possible!
What’s it to you if other states take different approaches to public policy?
I agree with James here. If MY state officials are not acting as I think they should, I need to get involved. I need to make my voice heard. In addition, I need to step up and help as I can.
North America would have become the best country in the world if it hadn’t replaced God with government and the almighty dollar. Our nation would have been a much better place without police, judges, Trump as a our leader that we did not need, demonic prisons that are unneeded, laws that strip us of our freedom we did not need. Being free to drive without a mechanically made plastic license is now a crime. In North America being free is illegal because Satan runs North America from the white house and all Christians let the government take away their rights and freedom. And they never want to make movies about anarchy which is from God and government is from Satan and he uses to oppress and encage people as animals in prisons. Iceland is a better country than North America because they don’t jail people like North Americans love to do.
Amen, Cynthia! When the feds try to handle matters that should be done locally, they make a wasteful mess of it. I used to audit government programs that had their genesis in the Johnson era–what a waste of resources (to be fair there were some well-meaning individuals working in the programs). As well, it’s all too easy for individuals to then take what is an all too common view that, “the government will handle it, and we can forget about it–after all, we pay taxes, right?” We do indeed need to take responsibility for our brothers and sisters. Now we’ve just got to convince the non-believing, secular thinkers of this point as well. Great article.
Thank you for your kind email. The possibilities, I believe, are endless!
” Now we’ve just got to convince the non-believing, secular thinkers of this point as well.” Wrong…we have to convince the righteous Catholics to take in the refugee, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, comfort the sick….etc. Matt 25 ……Unless we do this personally, regularly, without fear or hesitation ….we are the Pharisees. We need to convince each and every one of our own first and set the model and example of unconditioned love as in the Parable of Sheep and Goats …. then subsidiarity is a theory and not a practice. We are not near there yet!!!