Notes from Boise: What is 'good' goverment?

We use the term ”good” somewhat flippantly. He’s a “good“ person, that was a “good” movie, it’s a “good” car. Using the word “good” in these ways is almost purely subjective, relying on ones personal opinion or popular consensus, as opposed to an objective standard that all can

share independent from opinions and emotions. A person may do good because of some convention, or because punishment is in store for serious wrongdoing or, again, because other people will respect him less if he does wrong. He can, however, also do good from sheer love of

goodness.

How do we measure “good”? Is it solely defined by the majority, which is an especially relevant question when we think about “good” government. Is it defined by current societal mores? Or, is it defined by a transcendent value? The good of anything is found in its ability to accomplish what it was created for; therefore, something is good when it fulfills its purpose. In order to know if something is good, we must first know its purpose.

What, then, is the purpose of our government, and may we declare it “good”? Our founding documents provide the purpose by insisting that all men are created equal, by naming the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, by declaring that government is instituted to secure those rights, and that a “more perfect union” would “establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity...”

Thomas Jefferson adds to these precepts with the following: “Still one thing more, fellow citizens–a wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.”

These are all admirable values to pursue, which most would consider engendering “good” government, and, with the exception of a few

aberrations due to the sinfulness of man, history has shown us able to uphold these lofty virtues. The twentieth century, though, has seen our government depart from some of these founding principles. We have become more centralized, resulting in more authority being vested in the federal government, and specifically the executive branch. Government is insinuating itself more frequently into the lives of the citizens, introducing regulations, and demanding egalitarian outcomes, which promote equal results as opposed to equal opportunity.

The fear of factions has been realized, and many in government have lost sight of the overarching values that benefit an entire population and are motivated to solely promote whatever benefits their group. This drifting away has caused people across the political spectrum to become increasingly frustrated with government to the point where

both sides are saying our government is no longer “good.”

A corollary to “good” government is the “good”, or virtuous, citizen. A citizen who has the character necessary for republican self-

government, and who understands and acts to promote justice. Each generation must educate and equip the next to ensure a thriving rights-oriented republic through a commitment to the protection of fundamental personal liberties, the rule of law, forbearance of necessary governmental powers, and doing the hard work of protecting and preserving such a republic.

At its core, our government is still “good”. Our written documents continue to extoll the original virtues that made the foundations beautiful, but we, both those elected and the general population, have not used the tools available to us to constrain government from

growing into the form it now has. Does a “good” state depend on the existence of virtuous citizens, or only upon a good constitution and good laws? In our case, it is a healthy measure of both.