Date: 2008-05-15
Speaker: DANIEL E. LUNGREN (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr. Speaker. today I rise to speak about the role of government in our collective political lives and of the relationship between such government and civil society. It has been 219 years since this new constitutional republic formally entered the international stage. In 2008 I am privileged to stand in this historic Chamber of the United States House of Representatives in the second session of the 110th Congress. We should. representative and citizen alike. take great pride in our collective perseverance. Our longevity and survival as the numerically and geographically largest and most prosperous republican form of government in recorded human history is a testimony to the strength of this polity. An important part of that proud history has been our commitment to seriously debating the contours of any entity which we constitute to exercise power over the source and content of selfgovernment: that is. "We the People." In other words. we must continue to ask ourselves. what is the proper scope and role of governmental powers in and around our lives? " My colleagues. "subsidiarity" is a word not often used on this floor. Yet. is a word and concept which is foundational to much of what we do as representatives. the system of government under which we operate and the presuppositions upon which much policy is debated in thisChamber as well as in that other body. Subsidiarity. It has been defined as the belief that "a community of a higher order should not interfere with the life of a community of a lower order. thereby taking over its function." Subsidiarity "holds that nothing should be done by a larger and more complex organization which can be done as well by a smaller and simpler organization. In other words. any activity which can be performed by a more decentralized entity should be. This principle is a bulwark of limited government and personal freedom." Other intellectual and philosophic traditions have spoken of sphere sovereignty. principle pluralism and federalism. But behind allof these complexsounding terms is a simple fact. understandable by each of us. that there should be a proportional relation between the proximity of an individual and the amount of power of any governmental entity. be it local. county. State or Federal. may possess in relation to them. In other words. that government which is closest to us is usually the best government for which we should give function. Let me give the analogy of a human body. If we would say the body politic is like a human body. we would say that a healthier body politic is one which. like the human body. is infused with activity. or energy. In other words. if you had a human body. and you had oxygenated blood that only went to 90 percent of it. that 10 percent might very well die and be considered unhealthy. If you would have 100 percent of the oxygenated blood go to the brain. the rest of the body could not function. and the body would therefore die. Similarly. with the body politic. if all the power and if all the energy is visited here in Washington. D.C.. the rest of the body politic tends to wither. It loses its energy. It loses its enthusiasm. And ultimately. it withers and dies. Thus. as citizens. we do not. or should not. think it wise nor reasonable to immediately ask the Federal Government. the unit of government that is most distant from our lives. to solve each and every problem which our family. our neighborhood. our town. our city. our county. our State. or our region can address. Or. as academics mag describe it. subsidiarity provides appropriate discernment for responses to respective needs in particular ways. Foundational to the proper functioning of subsidiarity is a commitment to constitutionalism and the rule of law. In 1852. that great exslave. writer. abolitionist and statesman. Frederick Douglass. called the Constitution "a glorious liberty document." Because of the principles contained within it. and the antecedent rights which it protects. we cannot quarrel with Douglass description. His description is apt because the Constitution enshrined a system of government. based upon a moral foundation. which thereby allows the people to rule through majorities. and nonetheless simultaneously protects fundamental minority rights. Now. while we ourselves have not always lived up to it. subsidiarity requires. and the Constitution affirms. that no citizens. based upon arbitrary . and amorphous demarcations like skin color are permitted to be excluded from "the governed" from which consent is required. Thus. intrinsic to a proper understanding of and commitment to subsidiarity. the rule of law embedded within the Constitution requires a reasonable moral foundation upon which to anchor our commitment to law and the system of governments which we implicitly br explicitly support. As Robert P. George has written. "Where reason has no sway in practical affairs. the sole question is who has the power." Severance from a moral foundation would* leave our belief in and carrying out of the rule of law without a means by which to be secure. Law itself becomes power. Arbitrary will becomes the corrupted lodestar of societal comprise and the entire depth of justice. which now becomes a completely vacuous term. To use an analogy from Roy Clouser in his book. "The Myth of Religious Neutrality." "even the most violently anarchistic organization would quickly fall apart if it became devoid of all observance of norms of fairness or trust among its own members." And while although often unnoticed and unspoken in the daytoday happenings of politics and life. the rule of law. constitutionalism and subsidiarity are vital guiderails of our collective republican lives. As Professor Robert George has said. "The obligations and purposes of law and government are to protect public health. safety and morals. and to advance the general welfare. including preeminently. protecting peoples fundamental rights and basic liberties. "At first blush. this classic formulation. or combination of classic formulations. seems to grant vast and sweeping powers to public authority. Yet. in truth. the general welfare. the common good. requires that government be limited. Governments responsibility is primary when the questions involving defending the Nation from attack and subversion. protecting people from physical assaults and various other forms of depredation. and maintaining public order. In other words. however. its role is subsidiarity: To support the work of the families. religious communities. and other institutions of civil society that shoulder the primary burden of forming upright and decent citizens. caring for those in need. encouraging people to meet their responsibilities to one another while also discouraging them from harming themselves or others." Subsidiarity. then. is formed upon a commitment to the rule of law so that in our various spheres of societal life. anarchy and normlessness do not start to behave as is they have defined the rules of engagement in the fields of activity once and for all. The commitment to the rule of law makes plain why an appropriate understanding of the limited judicial function is so important in democratic selfgovernment. As Judge Andrew Kleinfeld of the 9th Circuit has written. "that a question is important does not imply that it is constitutional. The Founding. Fathers did not establish the United States as a democratic republic so that elected officials would decide trivia. while all great questions would be decided by the judiciary. That an issue is important does not mean that the people. through their democratically elected representatives. do not have the power to decide it. One might suppose that the general rule in a democratic republic would be the opposite. with a few exceptions." Thus. when I hear that my friends on the other side of the aisle asked the Supreme Court Justice nominees whether they. in the course of their tenure. are going to "expand freedom" or constrict freedom. and when I hear current declamations that nominees need to understand it is their duty. their job. their purpose. as judges. to "stand up for economic and social justice." I am incredulous as to what these words and terms mean. Freedom for whom? Freedom to do what? To whom? Whose interpretation of economic justice should be "stood up?" Whose interpretation of social justice? .How do these ends relate to the role of a judge. which is to rule on specific cases. not engage in abstract. roving. philosophic speculation&? The rule of law. our constitutional framework. and an appreciation for the complexity of society. which genuine subsidiarity inherently takes for granted. demand better. While what Ive outlined provides the legal framework and structural timber for the division of power and cultivation of society. we the citizens are nevertheless the most important factors in such a commitment- to subsidiarity. Subsidiarity requires a commitment by the citizens of the republic to comport themselves with selfrestraint. with virtue and with respect for ones fellow citizens. As the father of our Constitution. James Madison. exclaimed. "to suppose that any form of government will secure liberty and happiness without virtue in the people is a chimerical idea. We do not depend on or put confidence in our rulers. but in the people who are to choose them." M. Stanton Evans points out that "the reasoning of the Founders in this area was identical to that provided for Edmund Burke contemporaneously in England. Selfgovernment required observance of the moral law. respect for rights of others. restraint upon the passions. Virtue was thus a necessary precondition to a regime of freedom. and a Nation that lost its religious moorings was considered ripe for tyranny. Conversely. since religious belief and ethical conduct were matters of volition. the Founders also believed that liberty was integral to ideas of virtue." Thus. in order for subsidiarity to remain viable. we. as citizens. must work to cultivate the proper virtues within ourselves as well as strive to be meaningful in the lives of those around us. usually starting with our families. our friends. our community. neighbors and our fellow employees. On the other hand. society would not endure were each citizen to take upon himself or herself the maximum amount of criminal activity possible. Rampant and widespread destruction would lead to nihilistic physical and cultural chaos. Greater resources would then be needed to attempt to contain and mitigate such behavior. The peoples health. safety and likelihood of perpetuating society by bringing future generations into life would become severely constricted and diminished. George Will in his masterful work "Statecraft As Soulcraft" explained. it is obvious that "the restraining strength of individual habits and social conventions must be inversely proportional to the strength of restraints enforced by law." In addition to these individual consequences. the collective consequence of our view of government as one people would be tarnished. As Will again tells us. "regardless of democratic forms. when people are taught by philosophy and the social climate that they need not govern their actions by calculations of public good. they will come to blame all social shortcomings on the agency of collective considerations. the government. and will absolve themselves." Now in stark contrast. subsidiarity not only respects the various institutions and complexities laden throughout collective society. it also allows time for proper and respective maturation to take place. As George Will writes in regard on the bloodshed of mid18th century America. "what the Nation learned in Lincolns lifetime was that the. social cohesion which proceeds from shared adherence to a public philosophy and shared emulation of exemplary behavior and values is not the result of spontaneous combustion. It takes work. But by whom? And with what? Stich work is done with laws and other institutions. It is a citizenry working on itself. on its self. collectively. on its selves. individually. It is applied political philosophy." It is important to reemphasize here that subsidiarity offers no congratulatory patontheback for its citizens. At genuine humility and an honest appraisal of humanity attest. we are all here works in progress. Aristotle observed that man "is the best of all animals when perfected. so he is the worst of all when sundered from law and justice because man is born possessing weapons for the use of wisdom and virtue. which it is possible to employ entirely for the opposite sends ends." The dry wit of that great English parliamentarian and political philosopher Edmund Burke is instructive when he notes that "the effect of liberty to individuals is. that they may do what they please. we ought to see what it will please them to do. before we risk congratulations. As Madison and Lincoln. two of our most prescient American statesmen might explain. because men are not angels. government is necessary. yet .we must constantly appeal to the better angels of our nature. for failure to do so would result in the crushing of our intrinsic nature and the invaluable and incomparable dignity of our fellow man. My friends. subsidiarity is an important. and some would say indispensable. philosophy not only for the reasons I already cited. but also because of the flexibility it allows the leaders. the statesmen. of such a multifaceted republic. Such statesmen do understand the nature of law. We know that law is much more than a mere necessary evil or a clever contrivance or potent payback mechanism for partisan gains. No. Law is nurturing. Law is. conforming. Law is inculcating. As J. Budziszewski has written. "we know at least that the law cannot be neutral. Everything a government does it founded on some understanding of what is good. Moreover. no law that has effect at all can fail to have effect on character." Furthermore. true statesmen and women and leaders are discerning. wise and prudent. Again. George Will has observed that statesmen who are unaware of the ideas that shape the institutions currently in their custody. and uninterested in the ideas that shape the expectations and tolerances of the cititenry. are statesmen governed by forces they cannot comprehend. Ej 1700 Such statesmen are apt to think they have more range for effective action than they actually have. and they are apt to have less than they would were they more aware of the connections between the life of the mind and the life of society. Twentyseven years. ago. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan wrote that he had served in the cabinet or subcabinet of four presidents. He said. "I do not believe I have ever heard at a cabinet meeting .a serious discussion of political ideas. one concern with how men. rather than markets. behave. These are the necessary first questions of government. The Constitution of the United States is an immensely intricate judgment as. to how man will behave given the circumstances of the time in which it was written. It is not at all clear that it is working well. given the circumstances of the present age. but this is never discussed." A commitment to subsidiarity requires much- greater responsibility from our leaders. our policymakers and our representatives. My. goal today is not to spell out precise policy prescriptions for every foreign and domestic issue before us. After all. that is most of what we do here. These are. without a doubt. important. but they do not * comprise the whole of human endeavors nor the scope of activity within our policy. We must never lose sight of the importance of culture in our deliberations. One example of where we can strengthen the bonds of social capital in communities. while also working within reasonable budget considerations. is the partnering of private and charitable entities within the faithbased initiative. Now. some pouncing on the first word. as if it represented a perverse combination of a belief in unicorns with a draconianism of Statemandated medieval indulgences have ridiculed this endeavor as a corruptly-. ohdivine. power grab given patronage and power to theocratic institutions in our society. but nothing is further from the truth. . The faithbased initiative is merely an endeavor to treat faithbased charitable entities that provide social services as equal partners. partners on equal footing with nonfaithbased charitable entities in our society. You know. if a person is starving. does the source from where the food that quenches his hunger matter? If a person is without clothes. does it matter where the clothes come from that cover their nakedness? I dont think so. In reality the faithbased initiative is about eliciting greater public and private support for the smaller and often faithbased organizations which play a vital role in meeting human needs everywhere in our country. A true appreciation for subsidiarity may encourage parishioners so situated to kindly and gently admonish and encourage our various theological traditions and establishments to meet the humanitarian and simple life needs of their fellow men and women. Perhaps larger and more elaborate parking lots. gymnasiums. multimedia screens are not of immediate concern to the poor. the homeless. those without clothing. the hungry. the starving or the repentant prisoner about to enter society.