The colonial founder of Rhode Island, Roger Williams, fled
the Big Government of Micromanaging Puritanism in colonial Massachusetts to
establish a new government based on religious toleration and mutual respect for
all of God’s creatures. The intolerant Puritans were a walking contradiction
because they had rebelled against tyranny in England, but then they
reestablished the same in the New World. Unlike them, Williams was not afraid
of liberty, as many liberals are today. Democratic leaders and “Progressive”
elites insist, contrary to the very tenets of their label, that more laws mean
more safety and security for the community. More taxes, more spending, more
regulations will give everyone more protection, peace, and prosperity. Williams
understood that the grace of “leaving people alone” would work all things for
good. His fellow exile, Anne Hutchinson, was not an “antinomian”, contrary to
popular lore, but a powerful woman filled
with the spirit of liberty, who had learned about the New Covenant prophesied
in the Old Testament and realized in the New. If left to thrive, without
fearful burdens or provocations from the state, men and women will not just
survive, but thrive.
Man does not need a bunch of rules from the government in
order to live. He needs an awareness of a respect for law and order, tradition,
and custom, with the fewest set of rules possible which will establish an
identity of respect and community. Former welfare-brat turned millionaire comedian
Adam Corolla is the picture-perfect example that people do not need a nudge or
a nicety form the state to make it. Mankind is capable of great things, but if they
are burdened with rules or buoyed with subsidies, then they will not be able to
do much.
Despite the flaws of human nature, a culture of liberty and
freedom allows people to thrive, provided
that the voters can elect
politicians independent of intra-party wranglings and special interests.
Governor Chafee approaches this liberty, as the only
Independent executive in the United States. His example holds a striking parallel
with another independent, William Bloomfield Jr. of Manhattan Beach, CA. Like “Linc”,
Bloomfield was a Republican, but because he differed with the hyperpartisan
approach of the Republican leadership, he left the GOP. Bloomfield ran a more
than credible campaign against 38-year incumbent Henry Waxman, the former
Chairman of the House Oversight and then Energy and Commerce Committees.
What gave Bloomfield the freedom to take on “The Eliot Ness”
of the House of Representatives?
Bloomfield had sponsored
two necessary and effective electoral reforms in California: first, an
open primary system which permits voters to choose any candidate that they
support, regardless of affiliation. The top-two vote getters move on to the
general election. In the previous system of closed primaries, a Republican and a
Democrat were assured a spot in the general election, and third party candidates
were remained at best marginal contenders. In heavily slanted districts, the
election was all but decided after the primary.
The second reform, the Citizens Redistricting Commission,
took the power of drawing legislative districts away from the politicians and
gave it to a panel of California voters, evenly divided along party lines, with
four independents. The new districts forced incumbents to compete for their
seat, when they had received neatly drawn, safe districts in the previous
decade. Congressman Henry Waxman and his close associate Howard Berman had run
a political machine for decades because of Howard’s brother Michael and his undue
influence in the Sacramento redistricting effort.
Following these reforms, Howard Berman faced off against the
younger and more vitriolic Brad Sherman, who eventually won their contended
district. Waxman faced off against a savvy homeboy in a district which forced
Waxman out of his West Los Angeles comfort zone to the more moderate “South Bay.”
Waxman barely won reelection, and even he admitted that he was running the campaign
of his life to stay in office.
The same reforms which have returned the power to California
voters can do the same in Rhode Island. Not just as a Republican, nor as a classical
liberal who believes (as did Roger Williams), that free markets and free
enterprise make free people, but as a citizen who believes that real
competition will enhance individual liberty in the Northeast and throughout
America, I hope that Rhode Islanders will pressure their representatives and
their leaders to end the one-party tyranny of the union-bought Democratic Party
in Providence.
I have a more selfish reason, of course. I have read that
the Rhode Island General Assembly has contemplated eliminating the state income
tax. Massachusetts has also discussed lowering their sales tax. If these two
New England states, suffused with liberalism, are willing to lower the tax
burden on their residents, then the leaders and legislators in my state of
California have no excuse for keeping my tax rates so high. I would love to see
the day when California joins Florida and Texas, and even Delaware, as a state
with no state income tax.
Governor Chafee, lower your state’s taxes. You will do the rest of New England, the entire
country, and me, a huge favor.
No comments:
Post a Comment