Three reasons

There was an obituary in today’s Toledo Blade (I know, a liberal rag) that prompted me to engage in some reflective self-analysis. Twenty-five years ago this month my service as a member of the Ohio House of Representatives ended. There were a number of factors that influenced my decision to not run for reelection in 1984, but it was a choice that I have not regretted for this past quarter century. The obituary was for my opponent


in 1982…my final race. The gentleman’s name was Bob Heft, recognized designer of the 50-star flag and the mayor of Napoleon, Ohio. Bob was a decent guy and a worthy adversary. His passing and the twenty-fifth anniversary of my leaving legislature have caused me to examine how my political views have shifted though the years.

When I began my legislative sojourn in 1981, I was generally conservative…reflecting my background as a farm boy who became a small business operator in a small town. After encountering the cacophony of interests that surround the statehouse in Columbus, I found that if my representation were to have any coherence and consistency, then I had better more clearly define my principles for decision making. Early on it was apparent to me that many legislative proposals either ignored potential negative side effects or overlooked possible intervening variables that could hijack the original intent of the legislation. My positions began to harden, and my willingness to vote “no” grew dramatically. I began to resent the “we must have a bill” attitude that I observed from both sides of the isle. In my view, more often than not, no bill was far superior to any bad bill. Despite my frequent “no” votes state government continued to grow larger. So did the federal government, and as the state and feds issued mandates and “revenue sharing” schemes, so too, did the local governments. I witnessed very few cost efficiencies or improvements in service delivery.

Many large corporations and business associations have lobbyists representing them at the state house. Given that the state budget has grown so large, it’s only natural that they believe it necessary to lobby in order to protect themselves from hurtful legislation. It didn’t take me very long to detect that big government and big corporations were very similar in some respects. They have no hearts, no minds and no souls. That observation led me to conclude that those were the three primary reasons for my opposition to larger government and government’s willingness to engage in “sweetheart” legislation with large corporations. One of my constituents helped me arrive at that realization. He was a gentleman in his eighties who owned a small manufacturing company that did specialty work for the automotive industry. As he was guiding me on a tour of his facility, I remarked that surely his company had the potential for phenomenal growth. He agreed but said that they had chosen not to grow larger. “Representative Earl,” he said, “ we have 180 people working here now. I know every one of them, most of their spouses, and many of their children’s names. We cannot be as efficient and productive as we are now if we become so large that the employees can’t bitch to the owner on a first name basis.” This may not be an exact quote, but its pretty close. That lesson has stayed with me for more that twenty five years.

No private corporation is too big to fail. If a company becomes so sluggish that is inefficient, or their customer service fails to address the problems of the customer, then they should be allowed to drift away. New, more aggressive and innovative competitors will fill the void. Big government has no competitors to step up when it does not fulfill its mandate. It simply grows larger by claiming it needs more resources. As we have seen, when big government and big business work hand-in-hand to prop up one another, the superstructure becomes a house of cards. The insatiable government continues to consume more of the nation’s wealth, and the mega-corporations who are connected to the governmental umbilical cord fail to improve while the more efficient competitors are placed at a competitive disadvantage.

No heart, no mind, no soul. Three reasons for my becoming a passionate believer in personal freedom. Three reasons for my fear and loathing of an overreaching, uncontrollable government.

RIP Bob Heft.

Oh, there are three more reasons that I call for a saner government. They are twelve year old Shaun, ten year old Erin, and Sully, who will soon be eight months old. My grandchildren.