By Dr. Harold Pease

Most wish to protect liberty in their voting but may not know how to do so. Media accounts of candidate activities and/or their public statements by them­selves rarely give enough information to vote intelligently; and candidate debates, at least on the state, county, and city level, are poorly attended. One wonders if candidate charisma along with color, size, and number of signs displayed are not the most significant factors for most voters in making a selection.  Sadly the rule of thumb is that he who spends the most money wins the election.

There are a few things you need to do in order to protect liberty with your vote. First formulate a philosophical base that should go far deeper than the rhetoric of a political party. My own base begins with my strict Christian background. Regardless of party or ideology, I want my public servants to emulate such solid values as honesty, integrity, morality, etc.  I also would like to believe that when confronted with tough decisions they, like Washington and Lincoln, would not hesitate to ask God to illuminate their understanding.

Next, become immersed with the writing of our Founding Fathers as they have already traversed the same ground that we now tread and for the same reasons.  Parliament was ever so ready to impose more rules and regulations upon them.  The cause of the American Revolution was excessive government–consult any U.S. History text. Immerse yourself in the Constitution.  Stay firm to it regardless of party ideology. Individual liberty cannot be maintained by straying too far from that document or from the collective philosophi­cal base of that group of early patriots. Make their collective ideological base your own.

Their philosophical base consisted of many elements.  Space permits my covering only two or three. They believed that governmental power should be limited and strictly defined in a contract with the people. (See U.S. Constitution, Art. I, Sec. 8; Art II, Secs 2-3; and Art. III, Sec. 2).  Liberty lovers cannot support candidates who are ignorant of these limitations or who work to increase government influence outside these Constitutional parameters. Nor should tax monies be collected and spent outside these specific grants of power.  When this happens, power flows non-stop to Washington D.C. and away from the states and the people.  Once gone it is seldom returned.  Have your federal candidates read Art. I, Section 8, and are they willing to live within those parameters?

State candidates must be aware of federal limitations, and must be willing to oppose federal intrusion even if bribed not to do so by federal grants.  Are your state, county, and city candidates strong enough to “just say no” to the temptation to get “free” money to sell their authority?  Career politicians almost always sell their “birthright” to stay in office. We must apply more scrutiny to them. Said another way: when considering a candidate for public office, does this person actively work to keep decision-making power as close to the people as possible—even if it is unpopular to do so—or is his usual answer to every governmental dilemma more government and more money to fund more programs? The latter candidate is sure to leave us with less freedom and less money.

Another basic premise of the Founding Fathers that is crucial to the preservation of liberty is that we should never elevate to a higher level of government that which could be resolved at a lesser level. In other words, the county should never assume as part of its governance load that which the city could and should do. Nor should the state assume the prerogatives of the county, or the Federal Government those of the state, county, or city.  Those who make the decisions are less accessible, less accountable to local influence; and the program, now managed from hundreds or thousands of miles away, usually costs more because of less efficient management.  This principle will also help with respect to propositions for those states that have them.  In other words: Could this function be handled at a lesser level of government? If yes, then your vote should be no.

My last piece of advice is to remove from office as soon as possible those addicted to debt.  China already owns 10% of us.  Propositions are normally called bonds rather than debts to deceive the public who very likely would not support them otherwise. George Washington excused only war as a legitimate reason for debt.  Education might be a second but my experience says that they too should wait for more prosperous times.

I hope this helps.  We are indeed in trouble and need to return to our base to survive.  Together let us bring better people to the front lines. Our liberty is at stake.


Dr. Harold Pease is an expert on the United States Constitution. He has dedicated his career to studying the writings of the Founding Fathers and applying that knowledge to current events. He has taught history and political science from this perspective for over 25 years at Taft College.