Responsibility Will Lead to Freedom

               Eleanor Roosevelt was correct when she stated that with freedom comes responsibility.  The inverse is also true—with responsibility comes freedom.  As the individuals of a population become more responsible for themselves and their society, there is less need for government intervention.  In the extreme, a government becomes almost superfluous in an ideal society because the individuals comprising the ideal society would equitably satisfy societal needs without a government.  We do not live in an ideal world, yet, we must strive towards the ideal if we are to progress.

Striving to this ideal requires promotion of personal responsibility, which will justify our calls for increased liberty.  Too often, the Republican Party has focused myopically on personal economic liberty without promoting the notion of responsibility, responsibility for self and responsibility for others.  Calls for lower taxes and less government made without calls for voluntary individual sacrifice to help others ring shallow, and the government may be right to intervene if the talented or wealthy do not meet the needs of, and provide opportunity to, the untalented or poor.

The Republican Party can regain the faith of the American population if it becomes the voice of personal responsibility.  Government leaders can promote responsibility by passing good laws, balancing budgets and exhibiting strong leadership. 

The most obvious, although not always the most effective, means for elected leaders to promote personal responsibility is to pass laws that do so.  An example of a law that promotes responsibility is the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005.  This Act requires insolvent but high-income earning debtors to repay their debts in a structured reorganized plan rather than simply permitting them to eliminate their debts, and it requires all debtors to attend financial education classes.  This Act promotes responsibility because it imposes discipline and education on high-income earners who seek to benefit from government modification of the debtor/creditor relationship.  I have not seen empirical data, but I suspect that the discipline and education gleaned by debtors as a result of the Act produces debtors who are less likely than pre-Act debtors to irresponsibly incur debt after completing the bankruptcy.  This is a step towards realizing personal financial responsibility in our society, and a society closer to personal financial responsibility is a society less in need of government intervention.  The path to liberty is paved with personal responsibility. 

The most significant failure of the Republican Party at the federal level in the last decade is the running up of record budget deficits.  The GOP was unable to credibly preach personal responsibility and liberty as we exhibited fiscal irresponsibility and threatened our national freedom to creditors (e.g. our Nation’s need to borrow several hundred billions this year probably impairs our ability to freely criticize China’s poor record on human rights).  Furthermore, it is no coincidence that a government unable to exhibit financial responsibly produced the populace that was unable to demonstrate financial responsibility, leading us to the current financial crisis.  As America now lurches towards collectivism, it is apparent the path to servitude is paved with irresponsibility.

            Passing laws and balancing budgets are not the only means by which Republican Party leaders must promote responsibility.  Too often, elected officials focus exclusively on their affairs in Washington D.C., and forget that they are also societal leaders.  A leader in a free society should encourage his or her constituents, without compulsion of the law, to take personal responsibility for themselves and for their society, so that government need not.  For example, I envision GOP leaders using their power and prestige to recruit volunteers and donors to charity and education programs.  Further, I think the politics of liberty require Republican Party leaders to recruit volunteers to enter and assist those sub-communities that languish in the erroneous belief that submission to government is the path to freedom and prosperity.  Republicans will be the “Party of Yes” when we enter these communities and invite and guide our brethren into the broader society and comfort of personal responsibility.  Republicans will benefit politically when we articulate and demonstrate that individuals are more capable than government of equitably meeting the needs of our society.  The Republican Party will languish, however, if we simply preach liberty and less government without exhibiting leadership on the issue of personal responsibility.