You Can’t Do That!

Yet another example of the federal government fixing to tell us, "You can't do that!" A federal ban on texting while driving.

Of course, it won't really be a federal ban – they need the states to enforce it. So they push it on the states the usual way: do it, or we'll take away your federal funding. At a time when many states are facing disastrous deficits, who could refuse?

One point in tangent: although we hear about the few stories of disaster caused by texting, do we hear of the millions of people who text carefully and don't run anyone over? But that's not really the point.

The point is not whether you agree people shouldn't text while driving, or even whether you think there should be a law to prohibit it. The point is, this is just another example of the federal government taking power from the states. The four senators pushing this bill are from New York, New Jersey (not that I support it), Louisiana, and North Carolina. If the bill is passed, the majority of states will push their legislation down everyone else's throats.

If so much of the laws that affect our daily lives are mandated by the federal legislature, what's the point of having states?

Originally, the states were meant to preserve the local culture and philosophy of government. If you wanted to have a government with a more active role in people's lives, move to California. If you prefer more liberty – and forego the opportunity to control others' lives – go to Oklahoma. People are highly mobile among states, so it's much more reasonable than the choice of stay in America or move to New Zealand (or any other country).

When I first started thinking about this topic, my initial reaction was: what's the difference? If I'm going to have laws imposed on me, like the income tax or banning incandescent light bulbs, what do I care where those laws are coming from?

However, as I've become more and more obsessed with politics (it's a legitimate disorder), I realized that the people with the most impact on my life are a tiny elite group, hundreds of miles away.

If other people are going to have power over you, wouldn't you prefer they be a little more accessible than DC? 535 legislators rule over 300 million people. That's roughly one for every 560,748 constituents. No wonder so many people don't vote because they think their vote doesn't count!

My home state of New Jersey has 120 members responsible for about 8 million people, or 1 for every 66,667 people. That's much better odds than the federal government, and it gets better the more local you get. More than that, these people live in New Jersey. They're more likely to know what the needs of our communities are, and they have no other states with which to contend or negotiate legislation.

One of the main points of having a representative government is that we must hold our representatives accountable, and that is much more difficult to do when a tiny elite mostly rules over everyone.

If we want freedom, we should start by dismantling federal power and transferring it to state power (and ideally on to communities and individuals). Let the people who rule over you be the ones you can find at the next town hall meeting, not the ones who may never even read your letters or return your phone calls.

Otherwise, what will the federal government decide we can't do next?