The Destructive Administrative State

The US House of Representatives Judiciary Committee recently took testimony regarding the dangers posed by an ever expanding administrative state, especially in the hands of a ‘pen and phone’ president.

Matthew Spalding, Ph.D. from Hillsdale College explained how a slow, evolutionary coup d'état in the form of an administrative state has overthrown free government. This transfer of lawmaking power away from congress to an oligarchy of unelected experts who rule through executive decree and judicial edict over virtually every aspect of our daily lives, under the guise of merely implementing the technical details of law, constitutes nothing less than a revolution against our constitutional order.

Rather than control or diminish the bureaucracy through lawmaking or budget control, congress has settled mostly on oversight of and providing “regulatory relief” from the bureaucracy.

Today, the primary function of modern government is to regulate. When congress writes legislation, it uses very broad language that turns extensive power over to agencies, which are also given the authority of executing and usually adjudicating violations of their regulations in particular cases. The result is that most of the actual decisions of lawmaking and public policy - decisions previously the constitutional responsibility of elected legislators are delegated to bureaucrats whose “rules” there is no doubt have the full force and effect of laws passed by congress. In 2014, congress passed and the President signed about 220 pieces of legislation into law, amounting to a little over 3,000 pages of law, while federal departments and agencies issued 79,066 pages of new and updated regulations. The modern congress is almost exclusively a supervisory body exercising post-legislative oversight of administrative policymakers.

The only way to reverse the trend of a diminishing legislature and the continued expansion of the bureaucratic executive is for congress to strengthen its constitutional muscles as a coequal branch of government in our separation of powers system. This is the solution envisioned by our Founders, and consistent with popular consent. A stronger legislative branch would go a long way toward making the role of government a proper political question, as it should be, subject to election rather than executive fiat or judicial decrees.

The Constitution is grounded in the principle that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. This means that laws must be made by the representatives elected by the people and not unelected bureaucrats. Thus the first step towards restoring the structural integrity of the Constitution is for congress to reassert its legislative authority, and as much as possible, to cease delegating what amount to the power to make laws to bureaucrats and administrative agencies. In any case where it allows administrators the discretion to create significant rules, congress should assert its authority to approve or reject those rules. (One of Mark Levin’s Liberty Amendments would do just that.)

Congress needs to relearn the art of lawmaking. It must regain legislative control over today’s labyrinthine state, bringing consent and responsibility back to government through better lawmaking up front and as a result, better oversight after the fact. Regular legislative order, especially the day-to-day back-and-forth of authorizing, appropriating and overseeing the operations of government, will do more than anything to restore the Article I powers of congress and return legislative control over today’s unlimited government.

And the one place where the power of congress is not entirely lost – and where there is opportunity for gaining leverage over an unchecked executive – is congress’ power of the purse. Used well, it will also prevent congress from continually getting cornered in time sensitive fights over messy and incomprehensible omnibus budgets at the end of every year, the settlement of which works to the advantage of the executive. Strategically controlling and using the budget process will turn the advantage back to congress, forcing the executive to engage with the legislative branch and get back into the habit of executing the laws enacted congress – no more and no less.

Can our nation rationally expect congress to forcefully retrieve powers it has unconstitutionally assigned to the executive over the past eighty years?

Congress has proved to be impotent when confronted by the executive. The necessary reforms to restore congress’ Article I power can only be restored by We The People in our Article V sovereign capacity.

Perhaps a member of the very first Supreme Court, one appointed by none other than President Washington, may have left words of wisdom for such a time as this:

"The only real security of liberty, in any country, is the jealousy and circumspection of the people themselves. Let them be watchful over their rulers. Should they find a combination against their liberties, and all other methods appear insufficient to preserve them, they have, thank God, an ultimate remedy. That power which created the government can destroy it. Should the government, on trial, be found to want amendments, those amendments can be made in a regular method, in a mode prescribed by the Constitution itself [...]. We have [this] watchfulness of the people, which I hope will never be found wanting." - Elliot, 4:130 - Justice James Iredell (NC) - Appointed by Pres. Washington to first US Supreme Court

The time may have come for a rejection of the tired old ideas of tyranny which dominate so-called "progressive" politics of 2016.

Rather than being dispirited, we might examine what the Founders of the American Republic called, the role of "Divine Providence," whose pathway to the minds and hearts of youth can bypass even the most ardent and determined efforts of those so-called "progressives."

Now that "progressive/socialistic" politicians have captured their attention, we have some responsibility for directing attention of youth to the ideas of the Founders, all to be found online now, not in some dark stacks on remote floors of university libraries.

For instance, last year's Sons of Liberty portrayal of Samuel Adams might allow us to introduce to Millenials his clearly-articulated understanding of liberty versus tyranny.

"The liberties of our Country, the freedom of our civil constitution are worth defending at all hazards: And it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have receiv'd them as a fair Inheritance from our worthy Ancestors: They purchas'd them for us with toil and danger and expence of treasure and blood; and transmitted them to us with care and diligence. It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle; or be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men. Of the latter we are in most danger at present: Let us therefore be aware of it. Let us contemplate our forefathers and posterity; and resolve to maintain the rights bequeath'd to us from the former, for the sake of the latter. - Instead of sitting down satisfied with the efforts we have already made, which is the wish of our enemies, the necessity of the times, more than ever, calls for our utmost circumspection, deliberation, fortitude, and perseverance. Let us remember that "if we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom." It is a very serious consideration, which should deeply impress our minds, that millions yet unborn may be the miserable sharers of the event." Samuel Adams - Essay in the Boston Gazette, October 14, 1771
"When designs are form'd to raze the very foundation of a free government, those few who are to erect their grandeur and fortunes upon the general ruin, will employ every art to sooth the devoted people into a state of indolence, inattention and security, which is forever the fore-runner of slavery." - Article signed "Candidus," in Boston Gazette, December 9, 1771
"If the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them." Samuel Adams- As Candidus in the Boston Gazette, January 20, 1772
"The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave... These may be best understood by reading and carefully studying the institutes of the great Law Giver and Head of the Christian Church, which are to be found clearly written and promulgated in the New Testament." Samuel Adams - Rights of the Colonists, November 20, 1772
"It is the greatest absurdity to suppose it in the power of one, or any number of men, at the entering into society, to renounce their essential natural rights, or the means of preserving those rights; when the grand end of civil government, from the very nature of its institution, is for the support, protection, and defence of those very rights; the principal of which, as is before observed, are Life, Liberty, and Property. If men, through fear, fraud, or mistake, should in terms renounce or give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the grand end of society would absolutely vacate such renunciation. The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave." - The Rights of the Colonists, November 20, 1772

"Is it now high time for the people of this country to explicitly declare whether they will be free men or slaves. It is an important question which ought to be decided. It concerns more than anything in this life. The salvation of our souls is interested in this event. For wherever tyranny is established, immorality of every kind comes in like a torrent, it is in the interest of tyrants to reduce the people to ignorance and vice.” - Samuel Adams
And, as it pertains to Clinton/Sanders' "free stuff schemes":
“The utopian schemes of leveling and a community of goods, are as visionary and impractical as those which vest all property in the crown. These ideas are arbitrary, despotic, and, in our government unconstitutional.” - Samuel Adams

Treat the bureaucrats the same way the bureaucrats treat Veterans.

You don’t have to control every bureaucrat.

You only have to control the pay system.

Then, start messing up the bureaucrats pay.

When they complain, tell them to fill out the proper pay inquiry form. Then lose their form. Tell them they are too late to submit another form. Tell them that the state government paid them so there is no complaint.

When they still complain, tell them they are being disruptive and have the armed guards throw them out of the office. Show them some paperwork that shows that they actually owe the government money.

After a year, remove their name from all files and claim they never worked for the government. Tell them there was a fire and all employment records were burned up. Tell them that if they can get twenty people to write letters for them saying they worked for the government, you might look at it. Lose all the letters. Claim the employee is being belligerent and have the armed guards escort them out.

You just need to control the pay computer.

Turnabout is fair play.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.