As Paul Krugman identified in his January 14 column, there is a chasm between progressive and conservative views of the role of government—a fundamental, moral split.
Progressives believe that justice calls for a social safety net, so no one need die of hunger or untreated disease, and conservatives believe that justice calls for each to sink or swim according to his or her own actions only, with government tending to the role of military protection.
It is often framed as “big government” vs. “small government.” However that is a republican frame, and we need to shun it. The difference is real. But that frame is toxic.
Let’s face it. No one likes “big government.”
Why not?
Bureaucracy.
Big government conjures images of inflexible, impersonal, frustrating, wasteful bureaucracy. Rules, rules, rules, half of which don’t make any sense in many situations they’re applied in. Fill out this form. Fill out that form. Wait. Wait. Wait. Get this paper. Get that paper. Get this signature. Get that signature. Wait. Wait. Wait. Start over. Erghhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!
Frankly, the government would do well to streamline much of the bureaucratic red tape it has created—red tape that adds no value and confounds those who have to deal with it. For example, Elizabeth Warren is moving to simplify mortgage disclosure forms, combining two overlapping forms. Protection is actually improved by reducing the forms and clarifying the information. More of this could save money and better serve the country.
Solving national problems through government action does not mean creating vast new bureaucracies, but that’s how republicans frame it and how they martial independent support of their view.
When the republicans frame our divergent moral views as “big government” versus “small government” they are able to conjure people’s worst stereotypes.
You don’t have to defend “big government.” Reframe the debate!
The progressive position is about Opportunity, Freedom and Fairness.
Opportunity: There is no opportunity for people who are starving or illiterate or unable to get medical treatment for a disease. They can’t pull themselves up by their boot straps. We need a social safety net to give them a baseline to work their way up.
Freedom: Everyone deserves the freedom to breathe clean air, enjoy clean water, eat untainted food, travel on safe roads, bridges and rails, assume law and order will prevail. These freedoms trump the freedom of others to pollute, to sell putrid meat or unsafe toys or wreak other ills on the American public.
Fairness: Those who have the most can pay the most for the public benefits that we, as the American people, agree we want. The rich can pay more and still enjoy the fruits of their labor. The very richest can pay the most and still be very rich. They can help make it a better country for everyone. No one advocates that the outcome is equal for everyone. Some will do better. They can contribute more to the good of the nation and still have plenty left over to enjoy the material rewards of wealth.
So, it’s not big government versus small government.
It’s a view of government that enables Opportunity and Freedom, versus a view of government that entrenches the status quo.
Our view gives everyone a fighting chance at the American Dream. The conservative view maintains the existing winners and losers, driving toward a new class system where being born rich is what it’s all about.