Again?

The other night at supper my brother Tom asked if I had contemplated another run at Congress. Quite frankly, I've let that dog sleep. There are a number of reasons why I do not anticipate getting involved in running for a political office.

The first, of course, is the media magnifying glass. Aspirants to public office have no privacy. My family is entitled to its quiet enjoyment of life, and I'm fairly certain that a media spotlight would be unwelcome. It has nothing to do with a desire to hide the dirty laundry, but a very simple conviction that people who seek to pry into the lives of others simply to uncover possible defects are perverted. Most modern reporters are perverts.

Candidates are also expected to provide three word summaries of solutions to complex problems. Those who know me best realize that such a feat is not possible; in my case, all three words would probably appear to contradict each other. The Almighty spoke the world into existence, wham! bam!, but He took the rest of the week to fine tune it. I, of course, am much less skilled or powerful.

Then there is the problem of a defining platform. It is not enough to simply say that the best government is the least government.

Government is necessary because of sin. Perfect people do not need a government. The more sinful a nation is, the more it needs controls imposed from outside. The United States was founded as a "Christian" nation, in the sense that the underlying philosphy was summed up by "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness." The next statement of the declarators, however, was only partially true : "That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men," (true) "deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,..." (false).

The Scripture makes plain that it is The Almighty who institutes governments; Daniel praises Him as the one who sets up and takes down kingdoms. We read in Colossians that Jesus created principalities and powers for His own use. The "consent of the governed" has no more to do with determining the "just powers" of government than their consent to judgment by their Creator.

That said, the responsibility of man is to (1) love his Creator with all his being and (2) love his fellowmen with the same love the Creator extends to each individual. The righteous person seeks to see that his fellowman enjoys the "unalienable rights" endowed by the Creator. Whether a person lives under a monarchy, an oligarchy, or a republic, does not alter those responsibilities. In a sinless world, a righteous absolute dictator would have nothing to do, since his subjects would fulfill all their duties out of love for their Creator.

The United States began as a representative republic, was reconstructed after the Civil War as a representative democracy, and is in the process of being morphed into a parliamentary democracy. The declarators of American independence did not think through the logical end of their statement, that by means of the consent of the governed (pure democracy) the rights of the individual would be subordinated to the lusts of the masses.

Thus a political platform for a righteous candidate would not be palatable to the electorate. Recognizing the rampant sin within our culture, a Godly candidate would be required to espouse positions that would severely limit the ability of the people to exercise their destructive lusts.

A defining position of a Godly candidate (I cannot envision such a person as a politician) would be an insistance on equity. The Almighty is totally unconcerned with "fairness"; His will is to be done whether or not His creation agrees with it. Solomon wrote his instructions to his sons "to receive the instruction of wisdom, justice, and judgment, and equity", then promptly laid aside his own precepts and enslaved his own people to build his grand empire. Micah wrote that God requires that His servant "do justly", "love mercy", and "walk humbly" with his Creator. If all men are created equal, then it follows that to treat them unequally is a violation of the Creator's will. All should have equal opportunity, and none should have special privilege.

No government can function without taxation. Our Constitution forbids direct taxation unless in proportion to the census. This was a concession to the slaveholders of the south, who were allowed representatives based on 3/5 of the "non-free" persons within their states. Since private slavery has been abolished, there is no Constitutional restriction on a national poll tax. Such a flat capitation tax would be completely just and equitable, but any candidate advocating such a tax would be tarred, feathered, and lynched by popular opinion.

The closest thing approaching a flat capitation tax that might have a chance in the public arena would be a return to taxation as allowed by the Constitution -- duties, imposts, and excises "uniform throughout the United States". Because commerce today is far more global in nature than in 1787, a means of placing the tax in such a way as to grant equal competitive ability to United States enterprises would have to be adopted. Most of the trade agreements which now exist between the United States and other nations would have to be repealed.

If there were no taxes levied against production within the United States, and all retail purchases were subject to the same flat sales tax rate, an equity of taxation between the domestic and foreign producers would be accomplished. American manufactured goods would be freed from the burden of regulatory taxation, and if foreign governments sought to impose such taxes on their own production, that would remain their own obstacle to competitive pricing.

Of course, no candidate could be elected espousing such a position, and that means I would be unelectable. Going back, though, to the concept that The Almighty sets up and takes down kingdoms, it doesn't much matter to me whether such a person is electable or not. All I would care about is whether he follows God's precepts.

How high should the tax be? That is another problem. The more sinful a nation is, the more government it needs. The more government it needs, the more money it has to spend. Ergo, if the United States as a nation does not repent, it just might end up being taxed to Hell. The wages of sin have to be paid.