In political circles, I often hear the question “is that the proper role of government?” The underlying assumption is that there is a universal “proper role” for government that applies to all people everywhere, like a law of physics.
I used to subscribe to that approach, but being involved in local government, and listening to debates between property owners, has driven an evolution in my views. I found it interesting how often a property owner would energetically argue for “property rights” until the moment when someone else, who tried to exercise their own property rights, did something that negatively impacted them.
My current thoughts are these…
There are two fundamental principles that must be held inviolable:
- The citizens within a political jurisdiction must be able to influence the laws of that jurisdiction. In a representative government, this is accomplished through democratic elections that place law-making power in the hands of legislators. The citizens can change the laws by influencing or replacing those legislators.
- A citizen who is dissatisfied with the way their jurisdiction is operating must be free to exit the jurisdiction. This is the freedom to “vote with your feet.” If you are unhappy with the way a government is operating, you must be free to leave and move to somewhere you feel more comfortable. A government should not have the ability to build a wall to keep you in.
Beyond those two basic principles, I believe that any role the citizens of a jurisdiction collectively decide to place in the hands of a government body can be a “proper role.” For example, if the citizens of a nation decide that they would like to collectively shoulder the cost of a national health care system, then, in that jurisdiction, a national health care system is “proper” for those citizens.