D.D. 11/27/07

Subsidiarity is the principle which states that matters ought to be handled by the smallest (or, the lowest) competent authority. The Oxford English Dictionary defines subsidiarity as the idea that a central authority should have a subsidiary function, performing only those tasks which cannot be performed effectively at a more immediate or local level.

Subsidiarity in our government is dead. And both political parties are to blame. Ever since the New Deal and the Great Society, our entire concept of how government should function has changed - and for the worse. While it was Democrats who initially advocated stripping the power to care for the unemployed, sick and meek from ordinary bands of citizens - who used to care about each other - and more importantly from the Church, Republicans have bought into the philosophy over the years. It seems like they gave up on giving real power back to the states or to ordinary citizens years ago. Take a look at the Presidential candidates offered by both parties. Do you see any of them (with the exception of Ron Paul) talking about returning power to the states in a meaningful way?

Democrats are an obvious no with their talk of expanded federal health care programs, which are well intentioned, but still strip away communities. Their talking points make it obvious. If I have to hear the phrase "global community" one more time, I think I'll scream. I don't want a "global community" - I want my neighbors back. I want the old borrow a cup of sugar days. Republicans, it seems are no better. While they are better about empowering families, with personally managed solutions to problems like health care, they still strive to use the federal government mechanism to accomplish them. Tax breaks through the federal IRS, federal health bureaucracies to disburse and manage personal health care plans, federal oversight to make sure no one breaks the 15,000 pages of regulation on these "personal" accounts.

A little subsidiarity would do the government good. As I hear a lot of people saying, folks who like that principle are an instant lock for Ron Paul in the voting booth. But I can't vote for Ron Paul, because he takes subsidiarity to over application. Look at abortion or prostitution. Both of these social vices are items from which Ron Paul wants to remove federal governance. That is the essence of subsidiarity - remove the regulation from the higher power to return it to the lower. However, the assumption that this federalist position on abortion or prostitution is a good thing, is misguided, because it neglects proper understanding of the just role of government.

As Americans, we tend to focus on the the role of government in defending the rights of the individual. With good reason, of course, this understanding is also the understanding behind subsidiarity, as anyone can see. However, while it is important for government to make it possible for free men to choose to do the right thing, giving the good a right to exist, it is important to note that evil does not have a right to exist - and government has a role in completely eliminating evil. Therefore, a position which passes the ability to eliminate evil passes the buck at best and is truly negligent at worst. If you support the proposition that all power comes from God, even the power of government, then this is also an easy principle to understand.

Suppose Roe were overturned or federal courts were denied jurisdiction to adjudicate abortion cases - as has been widely talked about, the power to regulate abortion would revert to the states. Then predictably, several states would move quickly to eliminate this great crime in our world and several others would be quick to open it up even wider, perhaps even overturning the Supreme Court's decision earlier this year to uphold a ban on partial birth abortion. Instead of a clear enemy, an eight-headed Hydra would emerge. But at least the folks in Alabama would be doing the right thing, even if New Jersey didn't follow suit. Let's ignore the obvious moral contradiction here for a minute simply to examine the lack of charity in such a sentiment. True charity is not respecting the ability to do as one pleases, charity is showing what ought to be pleasing. And yet, in a world with state-decided abortion, this sentiment would be rampant. Now back to the obvious. GOP Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee sums it up well:

If morality is the point here, and if it's right or wrong, not just a political question, then you can't have 50 different versions of what's right and what's wrong.

Abortion and the like cannot be simply left for lower governments or individual conscious to decide. It is morally wrong, as we are taught. Like all evil, must be eliminated - not even given any right to exist. A federalist position on abortion is not the correct position, even if it does come from the mouths of Ron Paul and Fred Thompson. What are we to do? Who are we to vote for? I don't know ...