Some of you may be familiar with a survey from about a year ago, in which Americans were asked which party could best be described as "the party of big government." 28% of respondents said that would be the Democratic Party, while just under 40% stated that it was the Republican Party. Now, there might be a number of possible explanations for these results: maybe there wasn't a truly representative sample; maybe the 40% were all Democrats trying to give Republicans a bad name; maybe "big government" was perceived as a good thing!

But no explanation I can imagine allows us to escape the very troubling conclusion that there must be some truth to the charge. In fact, even if the survey were completely fabricated, the problem remains, because to an unfortunate extent, it still rings true! Why should the Republican Party be a group that anyone would accuse of favoring big government? Why wasn't it a laughable question to begin with?? I honestly believe that the Republican Party should be universally recognized as the party of limited government.

People don't want someone else telling them what to do and how to live, and I don't blame them. And traditionally, the Republican Party has respected this as well. For one thing, it stands to reason that nobody knows your needs as an individual better than you do. You live with yourself all the time! So you live with the consequences of your decisions. Your children are naturally more precious to you than the could be to anyone else, so it's obviously by design that you as parents are responsible to raise them. For these reasons, it should be easy to see why self-determination is preferable to coercion - that is to say, simply, that no one is in a better position to run your life than you. Likewise, with these things in mind, we have to recognize that it is also not our place to run the lives of others. This is the most basic definition of freedom, and I'm a Republican because I believe Republicans stand for freedom!

More importantly, Republicans have understood the principle that - not only is the government unqualified to take control over people's personal lives - it has no authority to do so! Our rights to life, property, privacy, speech, free enterprise, etc., are not granted by the government, but by our Almighty Creator. Again: the government does not grant rights; the government simply respects and, as necessary, protects them. But because our rights are divine and inalienable, the government must never presume it has the authority to take them away. I'm not trying to be too lofty here. I just mean to explain the perspective that Republicans have historically held when it comes to the role of government, because that is the foundation of the view, once synonymous with Republicanism, that in principle, the government should be limited.

Lately, though, the Republican Party seems to have drifted from that perspective. It doesn't come as much of a surprise to hear of people associating Republicans with big government. I tend to think this results from a combination of the expansion of government by the Liberals, on the one hand, and on the other hand, the desire to maintain goodness and decency in this country. So, if the Liberals are increasing the size and scope of government anyway - for their socialistic purposes - then it seems like a good idea to at least use that bigger government as a way to promote good ideas, like safety, or family values, or what have you...

But it's NOT a good idea! It just plays into the mentality that the government has all the answers, as well as the capability, and authority, to solve the people's problems for them. In the process, we invade their privacy, and we usurp their right to be responsible for themselves. This isn't the first time I've spoken out against this compromise. It does no good at all to the cause of liberty, to try promoting it through the venue of expanding government power. ...Not to mention the fact that everything the government does is funded by an extraordinarily wasteful system of taxing and spending!

For whatever reason, it seems that the Republican Party has not held fast to the principle of limited government, and it is to our detriment. If we don't stand for a limited government, then who will? And for that matter, what DO we stand for? Worse, it's to the detriment of the common citizen, who works, and pays taxes, and has every right to decide for himself how to live his life, so long as he doesn't interfere with the rights of others.

But Republicans don't need to promote limited government based on some over-arching libertarian philosophy. We can, and should, make our decisions and guide our actions by a more concrete standard - and it's as simple as respecting our Constitution. All of the problems I've outlined were foreseen by the framers of our system of government, and are therefore avoidable if we are willing to abide by the system they established.

It is time we returned our government to the size and scope allowed by the Constitution. Clearly, that is going to require working to make the government much smaller. Remember, the extent to which we reduce the power of the federal government is the extent to which we restore freedom to the American people. That's exactly what the Republican Party has traditionally been all about: above all because it's the law of the land, but also because it just makes sense! And that's why I intend to represent a constitutionally limited-government, Republican voice in the United States Congress.