Up and coming GOP leaders question relationship between people, Nanny State

Why real change will only come by reducing the number of Democrats in the US government.

By Kay B. Day

The Associated Press covered an event with former speaker of the Florida House Marco Rubio, a Republican who is campaigning for a seat in the US Senate. The header said, ‘Rubio says country relying too much on government.’

Lenny Curry, chairman of the Republican Party of Duval County, wants candidates to define their views about the relationship between government and the people. Curry is shown at the opening of the Duval GOP Minority Headquarters. [Photo by Kay B. Day]A few days prior to Rubio’s remarks, Duval County (Fla.) GOP chairman Lenny Curry posted a quick note on his Facebook page in conversational shorthand. Curry said before a candidate talked about specific issues, “I would like to know candidate view of relationship between people and their government. 1st things 1st.”

The conversation both Rubio and Curry want to have is beginning to take hold across the nation. Just how big do we want our Nanny to get?

For instance, Sen. Jim DeMint’s Senate Conservatives Fund is focused on electing true conservatives. DeMint is a Republican and the Fund has endorsed Rubio and a number of others.

When the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste PAC announced support for former representative Pat Toomey  in the US Senate race in Pennsylvania, CCAGW’s statement from chairman Tom Schatz read, “Pat Toomey is a proven leader in supporting limited government and eliminating excessive spending.”

The size of government and government’s reach into private wallets is probably the overriding issue of our time. What we do today will determine our country’s future character.

Obviously Democrats are incapable of reducing spending the hard way—by approaching the federal budget as a whole, and including foreign aid as a potential target for reductions.

It appears the current administration will be satisfied with focusing on tightening federal entitlement programs like Medicare. Eliminating Medicare Advantage subsidies is one example.

Yet the US taxpayer will assist with bailing out the country of Greece. The US currently provides healthcare to thousands of immigrants shuttled north from Mexico, a country bent on keeping its sense of nationalism by prohibiting anyone in that country illegally from holding a job. The War on Terror is mired in politics, further prolonging our presence, at great cost, in the Middle East.

US taxpayers have bailed out failing car companies and will now subsidize student loans. The government will ultimately be the largest health insurer. And the government-sponsored-enterprises known as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are a complete disaster.

Meanwhile billions go to support arts agencies and a national education department that are sinkholes for taxpayer money.

A few days before Curry posted his note, someone on Facebook pointed out that Duval County hadn’t received hefty earmarks from state government—the old ‘I want my  fair share’ approach. Our daily newspaper chalked it up to less entrenched leadership—the money goes where the longtime government insiders are.

I pointed out that we can’t very well ask for smaller government and expect pork here at home.

It’s time for American voters to examine exactly what role we want government to play in our lives. We have to acknowledge that the more services government renders, less personal freedom is one cost we will pay.

We have to acknowledge that, as I have pointed out long before President Barack Obama took office, we have built a government we cannot afford.

Many long term programs begun by Democrats—Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare—are fiscal disasters.

Obama says he inherited the mess we’re in.

But Ronald Reagan pointed something out in his diary on Sunday, July 12, 1987. Reagan was reflecting on a column in the Washington Post. The columnist had pointed out the only time Congress engaged in ‘carnivals’ was when Congress was Dem and the president was Republican. “Cong. has been Dem. For 46 out of 50 years,” Reagan wrote. ['The Reagan Diaries; ed. Douglas Brinkley, 2007. Pg. 515]

If you stack up all the power in terms of years, Democrats outpace Republicans by a large number of years in controlling Congress.

The predicament we are in now comes about in part because of Democrat Party policy. The current administration and Congress have taken Democrat love for big government to an all time high.

Curry is right about the conversation we must have.  What relationship does the candidate who wants our vote want to see between people and their government?

And I’d expand Curry’s premise. What relationship does the candidate want our country to have with the world?

As we navigate the muddy waters of former Dem president Bill Clinton’s globalization policies, do we really want to continue sending American wealth abroad to countries where it may be doubtful the aid even benefits those for whom it is intended?

Democrats have taken the US towards the Nanny State for years, even before President George W. Bush came into office confronting a ‘carnival’ similar to the one Reagan mentioned.

To restrain the Nanny State, vote out Democrats whose abuse of absolute power and disregard for the US Constitution are an affront to the Republic.

And hold accountable those we elect by not forgetting to monitor them once the election is over.

The Nanny State grows by the day. Leaders like Curry, Rubio and Toomey get it. It’s time voters get it too.