Natural Government

By Roy Tanner

Introduction

Where does the pre-eminent power of governance reside, and who is it that imbues and
animates government with this authority? As it relates to state policymaking, is it the
governor’s pen or the gavel in the legislative and judicial branches, which holds more
sway? Or do we err by even suggesting that we look further than the internal organs of
local governance, as seen in the bureaucracy, political parties, or interest groups? And
from a Western perspective, where the American experiment continues to validate the
concept of governance by the governed, is it too idealistic to just acknowledge that in a
democracy, the electorate holds latent yet ultimate power – through the ballot box?

While many theories compete in the marketplace of ideas, most agree that in the affairs of
mankind few things are as dynamic as the enterprise of government, and as noble as one
who answers the call to public service. And while scholars have captured glimpses of
government power by examining where it resides and how it is sustained – I contend that
to truly grasp its purpose and process, governing power is best understood when we liken
it holistically to a living organism. Using this analogy we can accommodate the dynamic
change that occurs within and without state government, as seen in a type of natural,
homeostatic process, which places emphasis as required, via federalism, to sustain its
equilibrium as it supports the mission to protect and provide for society.

The concept of ―natural‖ government is also consistent with our founding notions that
power is drawn from ―natural law‖ and ―nature’s God.‖ This organizing arrangement also
appears spontaneously throughout history, both within the context of Western culture and
to a lesser extent in every other culture tasked with organizing governing authority. That
said, the use of symbolism, types and analogies only takes us so far when interpreting
data. But to the extent that governing authority can be presented within the concept of a
living organism, I have organized my answers to the questions posed on state power and
policymaking in a manner that attempts to reduce the complexity and foster appreciation.

Intelligent design by nature

Hailing from the leading nation of the free world, some would argue that my thesis has a
Western bias. But clearly taking pages from history, the founders attempted to aggregate
best practices from the ancients before hatching a form of government that both tapped
the deepest longing of humanity (liberty), while mitigating our natural proclivity for
faction. In short, federalism in American government draws from democratic lessons of
Greece, republicanism from Rome, and their era’s greatest philosophers (Hobbes, Locke,
and Montesquieu). I know I’m being decidedly Western in my outlook, but stay with me.
In deed, Madison’s study of political history yielded no examples of long-lasting and
successful state confederations, short of integration with concurrent national government.
And as a constitutional republic, the founders also leveraged governing principles that
required a separation of powers, the checks and balance of three co-equal branches, and
bicameralism in state and federal governments, to yield a construct that protects and
provides for the natural rights (e.g. to life, liberty, and the pursuit of land), which the
founders understood to flow from God versus government [1]. Likewise, Adam Smith, in
The Wealth of Nations, alludes to this sovereign provision where free people are ―led by
an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of their intention‖ such that
pursuing our own interests—we in effect ―promote that of society more effectually than
intended.‖ In this notion we are provided with our first clue regarding where power
emanates – as seen in principles.

The governing DNA

Let me pause here to ask if you can picture the executive branch as the head? How about
the House and Senate legislatures as the arms? And would it be appropriate to envision
the judiciary as the dual legs of government legitimacy, as seen in the body of law and as
interpreted by practitioners of law? Sure this ―body politic‖ analogy may work in the
American experiment, but also keep in mind that while the form may be altered liberty’s
march has continued to expand ever since our founding. In 1776, the American colonies
had the world’s only democracy. 230-years later there are 117 democracies now in place,
comprising over 60% of world governments. [2] Which brings me to a second point.

For argument sake, start history over again and attempt to design a preferred approach to
governance, and I believe you would end-up where we are today in the free world, based
on how humanity is wired. Yes, we must allow for different temperaments. For example,
conservatives see humanity as selfish, requiring government intervention. And liberals
perceive humanity as perfectible, which again relies on government help. But over time,
pragmatists win-out by pointing to data on what works, eventually allowing a given
culture to discard that, which doesn’t. In short, pick any culture in time past and whether
they begin with a feudal system headed by a king or a tyrant, over time you’d still have
manifestations of the Lex Rex, the Magna Carta, and the Declaration of Independence.

Autoimmune systems

Having (attempted to) establish that authority flows from universal principles seen in
natural law, and that (if allowed to spawn) organic government will eventually take a
democratic form, let’s take a closer look at the American colossus to better understand
the intricacies of government internally. Let’s test our natural government theory at the
state and local level, specifically within the context of state policy making involving the
governor and state legislatures, courts, bureaucracy, political parties and interest groups.
If all politics is local, then we need to account for the framework, muscles, and organs of
state and local government too. And would it be too ethereal to suggest that the soul of
the body politic is best seen in constituencies and interest groups? How well does the data
support these analogies?

2
Dye and MacManus (D&M) opened chapter one of their text book with an interesting
statement – that ―politics is the management of conflict‖ – suggesting that state and local
government are about the business of providing more than just common services (e.g.
education, highways, police, water treatment, etc.), but rather they manage a group
dynamic of needs for people that have differing ideas about how and what should be
provided in terms of services. All of which supports the notion that governing enterprise
services is complex undertaking, requiring both repeatable practice and flexible process
to maintain homeostasis in body polity. (P2)

Having reviewed the policy responsibilities of states and communities it’s clear that while
national politics garners most of the media attention, ―the greatest volume of public
business, the greatest number of political conflicts, the majority of public decisions, and
the bulk of public programs take place at the state and local level‖ (P15). And apparently
this takes place so smoothly, so often, that it only infrequently hits the media radar screen
and is all but taken for granted short of an extraordinary event. This steady level of
performance can be compared to our autoimmune system, which are only given a second
thought once something acts up.

Organs of government - form precedes function

In brief, state and local governance are by no means unimportant political systems, as
they take on monumental tasks associated with education, transportation, health and
welfare, public safety, civil rights, infrastructure, and taxation. (Pp16-19). Starting with
governorships, chief executives are tasked with bureau management, formulation of
policy, building popular support among the public and helping to develop the state
economy (p232). The legislative branch processes hundreds of thousands of bills,
provides for constitutional amendments, approves and appropriates budgets, all the while
looking after constituent needs and agency oversight. (Pp175-176). And the judiciary
presides over authority to interpret their own state constitutions to guarantee individual
rights not addressed at the federal level, through a federated network of minor courts, trial
courts, appellate courts, and courts of last resort (Pp287-288).

Local governments, really an extension of state governments, comprise cities, townships,

counties, special districts, and school districts, empowered as delegated by the state.
Akin to the complexity seen in the human body, which is really a complex system of
systems, all told there are some eighty-seven thousand governments within the America’s
federated system (P326). The basic forms of city government in the U.S. include: 1)
Commission government, where legislative and executive powers are combined in an
elected commission; 2) Council-manager, in which the elected council or commission
appoints a manger to supervise city departments; and 3) the Mayor-council form of
government, in which the legislative power is exercised by an elected council and city
departments are supervised by a separately elected mayor (P343).

Operating in a type of cell network, authority flows downward like in a circulatory

system, replenishing provision as accountability demands push upwards from individual

3
citizens. The relative level of democratic governance versus representative government
again depends upon the demographics of the region to be governed. According to D&M
(P337), elected county executives for example wield significant power -- being elected
separately from the county commissions. At the next level down, governing power closer
to the grassroots is seen in subdivisions of county government as in city councils and
townships, which come in rural and urban models. It’s at these lower subdivisions that we
see the public more engaged, as in the town meeting form of government, where direct
democracy is utilized.

As it relates to implementation, bureaucracy is definitely necessary in terms of

aggregating policy expertise, implementation, and regulation. That said civil service,
more often than not, takes on a life of its own through growth in societal complexity,
bureaucratic expansion and incremental new program spending. With the electorate
increasingly demanding more for less, elected officials face a quandry on how to offer
government services more efficiently. Additional technology insertion is one answer, but
often, actual spending cuts must occur. In many cases, since civil departments will not
downsize on their own, legislators must require that either zero-based budgeting or sunset
laws be enforced, or they can resort to outsourcing of government functions through
privatization. Success in privatization though depends upon the mix of contracting,
franchising, grants, or a vouchers approach being adopted. (P258)

D&M rightly states, ―Popular participation in politics is the very definition of

democracy‖ (P92). And while this participation takes place in a wide variety of ways, it
most often takes the form of voting or joining an interest group. Interest group lobbying
attracts such large membership bases and subsequent contributions, they’ve become a
force to be reckoned with. Voting, on the other hand, is an extension of citizenship, and
together with interest groups they form the conscience of government.

Maintaining homeostasis

Natural government, if my theory holds, should also be able to accommodate challenges

with and without the body polity. For example, when it comes to supporting its
population centers, cities and suburbs offer an interesting contrast in models. According
to D&M, suburbs account for most of the growth of America’s metro areas, with 73% in
growth mode since 1990. The inner city by comparison, is typically associated with low
income, Democratic minorities and high government expenditure. The concentration of
social problems in the inner cities results from middle class flight, joblessness and
subsequent poverty. Rybczynski and Linneman also cite that while big cities lost
millions to the suburbs, they actually had net growth through annexation (P407).

That said, D&M suggests that the most important difference is seen in the contrasting
racial composition. As a result, the challenges facing ―shrinking‖ cities and diverse
suburbs are myriad. This is also occurring despite the dramatic growth of federal social
welfare programs and expenditures over the last four decades. However, purposeful
―gentrification‖ of downtown residential areas – attracting upper-class residents, trendy
restaurants and boutiques – seems to correct the cycle of inner city flight. Likewise,

4
redevelopment plans that favor commercial or high-income residential projects also
promise to both beautify the city and add to its taxable property value (P414).

Unfortunately, Rybczynski and Linneman point-out that the most common approach to
counteract growing inner city social costs has been to raise taxes without first attracting
new development. They also suggest that another approach to resolving inner city
decline is to reorganize under regional government, since metro areas link poor cities
with growing suburbs. But, while growing the size of the metro region may generate
some economy of scale, it also makes delivery of services less efficient. Rybczynski and
Linneman also see some promise in consolidation and to a lesser extent, formation of
enterprise zones. [4]

Challenges in key government services

Having established a sense of how the respective body parts of work in systematic
harmony, we still need to test how effective state and local government is to addressing
stressors to the body of society as it relates to rendering service. And the following
institutional challenges: public education, healthcare, rendering justice and systems of
taxation provide four examples. I begin with public education, where D&M research
cited ―the original goal for public education in America was to educate children so they
could participate in democracy.‖ (P517)

Affecting over 55-million students (K-12), few areas are as crucial to the future of the
nation as our educational institutions. And the 48-million who attend our public schools
have drawn the scrutiny of our leaders and parents based on some questionable results (as
measured by SAT scores and drop-out rates). According to D&M, the executive branches
of the federal and state governments though, have shown leadership by articulating some
challenging goals (e.g. 100% adult literacy; high-school graduation rates of 90%; U.S.
students being 1st in math and science, etc.), but the federal share of education spending is
usually under 10%, and public school funding is unequal from school district to school
district in most states – effectively creating unfunded mandates. Add back compliance
with NCLB (for those who receive Title 1 funds), and both states and school districts face
huge challenges, according to Young. [5]

In D&M (P520), a number of reform initiatives for ―reinventing‖ education were

amplified (e.g. school-based management, magnet schools, charter schools, etc.). And if
one method of evaluating educational performance is measuring dropout rates, then
developing programs that improve graduation rates through these approaches should be
endorsed. Finn & Gau also acknowledge a range of encouraging new approaches to
providing education (i.e. home schooling, schools within schools, tech-prep schools,
proprietary schools, design-based schools, virtual schools, and one of my favorites –
privately managed public schools). They go on to broach the trump card of resorting to
voucher programs, as well as the pitfalls of these approaches (e.g. more government
regulation and loss of independence). [6]

5
Resolving America’s health care (HC) system challenges are no less critical. Not only
does federally funded HC continue to add billions to our mandatory fiscal exposure (i.e.
comprising over 19% of federal spending according to the GAO), but it also continues to
fail in areas related to reaching the people who need it most. According to D&M,
approximately 16% of Americans are uninsured, and considering we’re approaching the
300mm mark in population, that rolls-up to a staggering number of people at risk. Part of
the conundrum is also seen in our ever-improving state of medical research, which (while
good news) remains out of reach in state funded programs like Medicaid, based on cost
containment initiatives. And while all the stakeholders in the HC value-chain (e.g.
pharmaceutical firms, hospitals, doctors, insurers, etc.) attempt to address the challenges
of cost-effective coverage -- these are the very same ones who compete for legislative
preference and limited funding allocations in state budgets that can no longer cope with
demand. (P563)

According to Barrett, Greene and Mariana, before we find solutions we must first
acknowledge, ―Americans are living with first-rate medicine and a third-rate health care
system. They go on to suggest, ―The overriding issue in health everywhere these days is
how to create a system that provides the benefits of 21st-century medicine in a way that
meets the test of a fair and equitable society.‖ [7] But according to King and Gordon,
with upwards of 50% of state spending paid by the federal government, state
governments are not about to abandon the current Medicaid system in mass. They go on
to cite 10-fixes that work within the confines of the current arrangement, such as:
remediation of the sickest people first, greater emphasis on prevention, reducing drug
costs, cracking down on fraud and abuse, greater technology insertion and making
Medicaid the payer of last resort. [8]

As it relates to maintaining law and order, how does organic government adapt to the
ever-rising docket of court cases? Even with the low percentage of cases that reach court
(based on actual crimes committed versus those reported, caught, cleared, plea bargained,
mediated, etc.), the American court system is still overwhelmed by the aggregate volume
of criminal and civil cases. America has rightly been described as the most litigious
society in the world (D&M 284). In addition to percentage attrition in criminal cases, tort
reform of civil cases offers remedy through: caps on pain and suffering awards,
eliminating punitive damages, restricting legal fees, ending joint and several liability, and
requiring the losing party to pay court costs and legal fees. According to Greenblatt, the
accelerating case processing through a ―rocket docket’ policy enables decisions in 24-
hours on 99% of cases that don’t involve novel issues likely to add to the body of existing
case law. [9]

As for the demilitarized legal zone that minors occupy (who are too old for juvenile court
but too young for adult court), Wheaton reports that many favor an expanded role for
juvenile courts, while other still lobby for adult court. While unresolved uniformly, I
believe states should defer to the maturity and intent demonstrated to make a
determination. And regarding resolution of myriad other social problems, Kinsella cites
the emergence of ―specialty courts‖ to adequately address the unique demands of drugs,
family, mental health and domestic violence cases. Provided initial budget are funded in

6
these areas, specialty courts promise more effective resolution with millions in savings
and reduced recidivism. [10]

And last but not least natural government must find ways to sustain the growth of tax
revenues. Through give and take some balance is struck each fiscal year. A dynamic mix
of services and tax revenues are brought to bear in state budgets, with the federal
government making-up about 20% of the contribution. According to D&M, states receive
the greatest percentage of their tax revenues from income tax, and states that rely more on
sales taxes are more likely to have progressive tax systems that require more from higher
income groups. Additional means include regressive taxes, that take a larger percentage
of their incomes in taxes from low income groups, and proportional taxing, which
requires all income groups to pay the same percentage on their income in taxes. And
according to Tubbesing and Williams, an untold harvest of sales taxes can be recovered
from online sales after the process is further streamlined universally. [11]

Local government derives the majority of its revenue from property taxes, which
according to Ginsberg, are not assessed in a uniform manner, but rather on which
constituent group is most successful at lobbying for their interest in favor of reductions.
Ginsberg goes on to suggest measures that ensure fairness (e.g. like rooting out
favoritism and slipshod assessment), but at the end of the day, if property taxes are cut,
other taxes must be raised to make up for lost revenues. [12]

Conclusion
Government in general, and American state and local government in particular, is best
understood in all its complexity as conforming to ―natural‖ government by intelligent
design. From the governor’s agenda, to the legislator’s bill, to the constitutional audit of
judicial review, power is vested in equal share to branches called to perform different
roles. And as the executive heads formulation of plans, and legislative hands move new
law though process and we stand on the legitimacy of courts decisions – polity is organic.
State and local bureaucracy, county commissioners, city mayors, school boards, and
regulatory bodies only replicate these patterns, while interest groups and the electorate
provide us with the notion of conscience. And the best part of this intricate and
interdependent organism called government is that it is self-heeling – through its ability
to adapt to change and maintain the equilibrium that sustains our society.

All things considered, what can we conclude? Based on what has been proffered, with
regard to my theory of ―natural‖ government, it would seem that the answer to both of
our questions are one and the same. Simple logic suggests that preceding every thing is a
thought, and preceding every thought is a thinker. So when it comes to determining
where power resides, I would assert that authority flows to policy by governing principle,
and that governing principle is derived from an innate prodding of conscience to govern
as ordained by the person of our Creator. And as to where governing power is most
appropriately manifest, I would also suggest we defer to this chain of command (i.e.
policy to principle, principle to person of authority), and where this takes us results in
public service that from top to bottom acknowledges servant leadership – naturally.

7
References:
[1] Madison, James (1787). The Federalist, No. 10, The Federalist Papers
[2] Muravchick, Joshua (2005). The American Enterprise Institute Newsletter
[3] Dye, Thomas R. & MacManus, Susan A. (2003). Politics in States and Communities,
Eleventh edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
[4] Rybzynski, Witold & Linneman, Peter (1999). How to save our shrinking cities,
The Public Interest.
[5] Young, Scott (2003). The challenges of NCLB, State Legislature.
[6] Finn, Chester & Gau, Rebecca (1998). New ways of education, The Public Interest.
[7] Barrett, Katherine; Greene, Richard & Mariani, Michele (2004). A case of Neglect,
Governing.
[8] King, Martha & Gordon, Dianna (2004). Medicaid, State Legislatures
[9] Greenblatt, Alan (2001). Docket Science, Governing Magazine.
[10] Kinsella, Chad (2004). Special Courts, State News.
[11] Tubbesing, Carl & Williams, Graham (2002). Simple Sales Tax, State Legislatures
[12] Ginsberg, Steven (1997). Two Cheers for the Property Tax, The Washington
Monthly