On Limited Government: KISS?

While ruminating this afternoon about the current presidential election campaign, something shifted in a way that revealed how the concept of limited government has been emasculated. The concept of limited government has been reduced to war cries about two issues: abortion and taxes. To be clear both are vital issues. However they have become means to different ends, rather than two manifestations of a common theme: limited government or minimizing the role of government in our daily lives.    

The abortion 'debate' gets pitched as a debate about "individual rights," "reproductive rights," and myriad other "rights."  At risk of being overly simplistic, the discussion should be about individual choice.  A less government approach would preclude the government from entering this arena; would allow individuals to make decisions about their lives. Simplistic, yes. 

Taxes reflect the scope and range of government programs.  Fewer government programs translate to less demand for government funds. Lower demand for government funds translates to a lower tax burden.  Simple. 

Encourage discussions about programs to take place at the local level. The closer a program is to the source of need and support, the more efficient the program is likely to be in terms of financial and human resources.  

Would that our politicins be able to communicate clearly about what government programs, especially federal government programs cost -- both in financial and human terms.  Would that our politicians could effectively make the case that less government translates to greater individual  freedom, greater efficiency in delivery of programs (if decision making is moved to the local level), and a more dynamic set of choices as market forces are not impeded.

Simplistic? Yep. But there's much to be said in support of the KISS principle.