Government's Legitimate Role a Free Society.

• Author: WILLIAMS, WALTER E.
• Position: Evaluation

"WHAT DID the Founding Fathers see as the legitimate role of government? To answer that question, turn to the rule book they gave us: the Constitution. Most of what they considered legitimate functions of the Federal government are found in Article I, Section 8, which says, in part: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; To borrow Money on the credit of the United States; To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes; ... To coin Money ... To establish Post Offices and post Roads ... [and] To raise and support Armies."

The Framers granted Congress taxing and spending powers for a few other activities, but nowhere in the Constitution do we find authority for up to three-quarters of what Congress taxes and spends for today. There is no constitutional authorization for farm subsidies, bank bailouts, food stamps, or midnight basketball. We have made a significant departure from the constitutional principles of individual freedom and limited government that made the U.S. a rich nation in the first place. These principles of freedom were embodied in our nation through the combined institutions of private ownership of property and free enterprise, both of which have suffered devastating attacks and are mere skeletons of what they were in the past.

Private property performs at least two important social functions: It encourages people to do voluntarily what is in the social interest, and it minimizes the coercive power that one man or the state can have over another. It performs these functions without appeals to beneficence.

I do not care much about future generations. After all, what has a child not to be born until 2050 ever done for me? My actions, however, do not reflect this personal sentiment. Several years ago, I planted young trees on my property and made other improvements. I will be dead by the time the trees mature. A child born in 2050 will enjoy the fruits of my sacrifices. I could just as easily have spent the money for steaks and fine Bordeaux wine, which I would have fully enjoyed all to myself.

Why did I make these improvements? At least part of the reason is that I will get a higher price when I sell the property if its quality is greater and it can be expected to provide housing services for a longer period of time. By pursuing my own interest, I made it possible for future generations to have a nice house.

Would I have had the same strong incentive if the government owned my house? Obviously not. Look around the world and you will see that what receives the worst care tends to be commonly owned; that which receives the best care tends to be privately owned. In free markets, one's personal wealth is held hostage to socially...