This page was last updated on April 8, 2012.
Small government something sinister; Jerry Miskulin; Beaver County Times; April 8, 2012.
I encourage you to review Mr. Miskulin’s body of work in the archives. Mr. Miskulin has written at least 79 letters since 2004 (I didn’t critique all of them.). Most (all?) are illogical and full of falsehoods (not just wrong).
Mr. Miskulin expressed displeasure with the tea parties (here and here), proclaimed
Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.
“When someone says he’s for ‘small government’ or ‘states’ rights’ I automatically assume they cherish Jefferson Davis and use Jim Crow as a mascot.
“Small government is rule by an oligarchy, only this time African Americans will be joined by the poor whites begging for what little crumbs they can get.
“As we drift into a culture where money is the end all, we have to realize that it’s a new day. I look around at all the good people I’ve grown up with and realize one day they may be my enemies.
“We’ve turned our back on fair play and there’s no apology in the words we say. Small government or states’ rights is something sinister. It’s something anathema to most Americans.”
[RWC] Given his letter-writing body of work, Mr. Miskulin needs to look in the mirror. Name-calling and personal attacks, including the first sentence of this letter, are the rule for Mr. Miskulin.
“Much like the civil rights movement, we must turn to our ministers. If they can’t help us in this time of troubles, then our problems are double.”
[RWC] Apparently, Mr. Miskulin doesn’t think much of the U.S. Constitution and the Founding Fathers. That’s because the Constitution screams “small government” and “states’ rights.”
Regardless of what they called themselves individually, our Founding Fathers were, as a group, conservative using today’s terminology. That’s why the U.S. Constitution spells out so few explicit federal government responsibilities. In Federalist #45, James Madison (a Founding Father and fourth President) wrote,
“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.
“The operations of the federal government will be most extensive and important in times of war and danger; those of the State governments, in times of peace and security. As the former periods will probably bear a small proportion to the latter, the State governments will here enjoy another advantage over the federal government. The more adequate, indeed, the federal powers may be rendered to the national defense, the less frequent will be those scenes of danger which might favor their ascendancy over the governments of the particular States.”
To make sure the authors’ intent was not misunderstood, the 10th Amendment states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people.” The original Constitution plus the Bill of Rights scream limited government, at least at the federal level.
Though taken away by the 17th Amendment, Article I, Section 3 of the original Constitution gave the states representation in Congress: “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.” If the 17th Amendment isn’t the worst amendment, it’s pretty close.
© 2004-2012 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.