With Mike Morrell: What is Progressivism?

SAN BERNARDINO>> Political observers today continue to document the polarization of politics in the United States. As old ideologies that seem new again push to the forefront of the political playing field, the American people are further breaking down into differentiating and isolating groups. The current debate can be summed up as one of progressivism versus free market constitutionalism. Sometimes, when people think of progress, they think of it in terms of science and technology. Politically, however, progressivism means the expansion of the bureaucratic state. It is the road to bigger, more centralized, and controlling government for the alleged purpose of achieving social and economic progress, using heavy-handed legislation. Some have also referred to it as “socialism-lite.” Constitutionalism, though, is based on the principle that government belongs to the people and the states. The people are governed by consent, as it says in the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence. “We the People” is more than just an introductory phrase in the Constitution. Elected officials chosen by the people run for the people and big government means nothing more than the erosion of liberty. Progressivism has been pushed as a positive ideology, especially as of late. Governor Jerry Brown identifies as a progressive. President Barack Obama refers to himself as a progressive. In coastal California, in particular, progressivism has found traction. If we look at history, however, a pattern can be clearly identified that shows progressivism does not work, whether ancient or modern day Greece. As government expands, liberty contracts and as liberty contracts, freedom and prosperity soon cease to exist. Winston Churchill and other political philosophers of the 20th century have stated that ideologies like progressivism lead to socialism and then to despotism, tyranny and then tyranny by force. Therefore, we must be careful how we vote and who we give consent to govern over us. As an example, we have seen educational success in America significantly deteriorate. In the 1950s and 1960s, America ranked first in the world when education was under state and local control, leaning on parents, teachers, and school board members to make critical decisions about the classroom, rather than bureaucrats in a far-off land called Washington, D.C. But then, Jimmy Carter became president and consolidated a considerable amount of authority over education away from the local districts to the halls of the Capitol. In 1994, President Bill Clinton signed the Goals 2000: Educate America Act, giving the federal government even more power over the states. Seemingly well-meaning programs like No Child Left Behind have also been adopted, placing more power in the hands of a few with limited checks and balances. As more and more bills are put in place and federal resources are given to the states, the idea is that education would improve. Yet, test scores continue to drop to the point where America is internationally ranked 17th in reading and 26th in math. After being in the California Senate, I am convinced, again, that the parents, teachers, and school board members in our local communities are as capable, if not more so, of determining what is best for our students. Returning to our principles of limited constitutional government, empowering those leaders closest to the people they serve to make critical decisions that impact our everyday lives – whether in education, transportation, public safety, etc. – is how our nation will continue to remain the most influential leader on the world stage. Senator Mike Morrell, R-Rancho Cucamonga, represents the 23rd District in the State Senate which includes portions of Riverside, San Bernardino, and Los Angeles counties.