BrianGarst.com

When Newt Gingrich rode a limited government tidal wave into the Speaker’s chair, ushering in the first Republican House majority in 40 years, it was both the culmination of decades of conservative growth and the beginning of a new Republican era. What Barry Goldwater began and Ronald Reagan brought to the forefront of the national conscience, Newt and the ’94 young guns finished while quickly delivering on their legislative promises.

But that isn’t the end of the story. Today we have a Republican President with an approval rating barely hovering over 40, a Republican Senate that comes together to advance a progressive agenda far more often than one focused on liberty, a Republican House that can’t get pork-barrel spending under control or even eliminate a single worthless government program, and an electorate dangerously close to kicking them out of power. The question so many small government advocates are asking is, how did we get here?

Answering this question requires a bit of ideological introspection. We must come to grips with the fundamental dichotomy inherent in our beliefs that makes governing by limited government principles extremely hard work.

Leaders in America tend to be current or former members of government. That’s no surprise, as they get the media coverage and national recognition that leadership requires. The conservative movement is no different. It’s only natural that members of government are going to turn to government methods to advance their cause.

For conservatives, libertarians and those who favor less government, however, that results in a clash of principles, with the loser most often being the principle of limited government. It takes a lot of self discipline to refrain from using power to do what seems right and to make things better. But that is precisely what the preservation of liberty so often requires, and it’s also precisely where conservatives and Republicans in particular have failed with increasing regularity.

The left does not have to face this dilemma. They have ideas that they believe can make America better, just the same as we do, but no conflicting principle that prevents them from using government whenever possible to implement those ideas. Many self-professed conservatives thought they could just come into power and do the same things, substituting their ideas for those of their liberal counterparts and their base would be happy. But it doesn’t work that way, because their base doesn’t believe government has all the answers.

Ronald Reagan said that, “governments tend not to solve problems, only to rearrange them.” It’s a lesson that conservatives need to relearn. They’ve lost theirway and are focusing their efforts in the wrong directions. Separation of cultural views from governmental principles and keeping respective efforts to advance each agenda limited to the appropriate sphere would be a good start.

If you believe people shouldn’t gamble, convince them why you are right; don’t legislate it. Otherwise you are no different than a statist who tries to use government to prevent people from smoking or eating fatty foods. Work to convince people to believe what you believe instead of legislating their behavior. Faithfully living up these standards requires serious dedication and leaders who are intellectually honest. That’s the principled, liberty-minded way.