"THE LAND OF THE FREE" IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY
http://www.independent.org/tii/forums/040309ipfTrans.html
Can today's high tax rates, massive bureaucratic regimes, Byzantine
regulations, and government attacks on property rights all be
reconciled with the founding principles of America?
According to economist Richard Epstein, James Parker Hall
Distinguished Service Professor of Law at the University of Chicago,
the U.S. government has grown enormously to the detriment of
individual liberty, constitutional republicanism, and the common law
- especially in the realms of eminent domain, contract law, wealth
distribution and federalism.
Epstein, author of the new book, "Skepticism and Freedom: A Modern
Case for Classical Liberalism," spoke at the recent Independent
Policy Forum entitled, "The Promised Land of the Free," presenting
his argument that the classical liberal traditions of America's past
have suffered incredibly under the weight of U.S. government
bureaucracy and imprudent judicial activism.
Whereas in the period between the Civil War and the New Deal, the
courts generally upheld the doctrine that "the basic liberties that
people had S included the right of people to dispose their labor as
they saw fit," Epstein admonished post-New Deal court decisions that
expanded "the commerce power to give the federal government plenary
power to regulate essentially every economic activity under the sun."
But while Epstein believes that government is needed "to supply some
kind of social infrastructure," which means society needs "a system
of taxes" and "a system of takings," San Jose State economics
professor Jeffrey Rogers Hummel doesn't agree.
Also speaking at "The Promised Land of the Free," Hummel argued that
Epstein gives too many concessions to government. Borrowing a phrase
from the title of Epstein's earlier book, Simple Rules for a Complex
World, Hummel critiqued Epstein's analysis on the basis that "his
simple rules for a complex world, as they apply to government, are
not simple enough."
In particular, Hummel argued that taxation is unethical and
unnecessary and that economic regulation, since it shields firms from
competition, is a "cure [that] proves worse than the disease." And
while Epstein favors utilitarian arguments against government
policies, Hummel prefers the use of moral arguments to sway the
general public away from embracing government policies such as
taxation.
During the Q&A portion of the event, Epstein and Hummel discussed
many topics, including the differences between behavioral and
consequentialist economics, the viability of achieving limited
government, political organization as a strategy for liberty,
constitutional interpretation, and the triumphs and losses for
American freedom in recent years.
For a transcript of "The Promised Land of the Free," featuring
Richard Epstein and Jeffrey Rogers Hummel (3/9/04), see
http://www.independent.org/tii/forums/040309ipfTrans.html.