Fred!, Good Timing

"Federalism is not an 18th century notion. Or a 19th century notion. It retains its force as a basic principle in the 21st century, because when federalism is ignored, accountability, innovation, and public confidence in government at all levels suffer."

Well, I guess timing really is everything.

In a recent post, I sketch a quick summary of thoughts regarding the assumed candidacy of Fred! Thompson.

The first point of this piece was to reflect upon the ways Fred! does and does not reflect the Reagan of history - rather than the Reagan of imagination. Central to my findings is that Fred probably most resembles the Reagan of history in his commitment to a limited role for the Federal government in areas outside of defense, homeland security and interstate trade.

About the next day, the Thompson campaign released this piece from Fred! Outlining his commitment to limited Federal government and the devolution of power back to the various states.

It's nice to sometimes find oneself riding the very pulse wave of punditry! :)

A few key paragraphs from the piece if you don't have time to read it all:

>>>>>>>>>>>>

We developed institutions that allowed these principles to take root and flourish: a government of limited powers derived from, and assigned to, first the people, then the states, and finally the national government. A government strong enough to protect us and do its job competently, but modest and humane enough to let the people govern themselves. Centralized government is not the solution to all of our problems and – with too much power – such centralization has a way of compounding our problems. This was among the great insights of 1787, and it is just as vital in 2007.

<<<<<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>>>>>>>

This in no way diminishes the important role played by the national government, including ensuring our national security, and regulating interstate commerce to promote free markets. Indeed, a commitment to federalism would help the federal government do a better job in addressing national emergencies and emerging threats, because it could focus on these issues rather than on everything else it is trying to do. A proper regard for constitutional boundaries would also go a long way in avoiding the arguments that follow when Washington acts by decree, disregarding the elected representatives of the fifty states.

<<<<<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>>>>>>>

This in no way diminishes the important role played by the national government, including ensuring our national security, and regulating interstate commerce to promote free markets. Indeed, a commitment to federalism would help the federal government do a better job in addressing national emergencies and emerging threats, because it could focus on these issues rather than on everything else it is trying to do. A proper regard for constitutional boundaries would also go a long way in avoiding the arguments that follow when Washington acts by decree, disregarding the elected representatives of the fifty states.

<<<<<<<<<<<<

On Principle,

CBass