As we celebrate Independence Day, it's a great time to reflect on how dependent we've become on a federal government that knows and respects no boundaries. The statistics are stunning, and best shown by the simple chart to the right. The red bars show government spending growing 4 times faster than the economy, from 12% prior to the New Deal, to 43% today. The blue bars show non-government, private spending declining over that same time period from 88% down to 57% today.

The vast majority of Americans are concerned about our nation's direction. What is astonishing, however, is that after 80 years of growing government to our nation's detriment, many Americans are still looking for the government to "help". If we're not pleased with government "assistance" at this point, how can we justify giving additional money and power to government that increasingly serves itself as opposed to the people?

Self-serving government exists at every level: federal, state, and local. At the federal level, the Congressional pension program will provide a lifetime of benefits to David Price when he leaves Congress. I can't think of a single competitive industry that still offers a pension program -- how can our government justify such an insult to the American worker?

At the local level, the Chapel Hill Town Council recently stirred up controversy by voting to provide healthcare benefits for outgoing members. Imagine that -- serve two terms on the Town Council, get free healthcare coverage until you are eligible for Medicare. A groundswell of criticism caused the council to immediately rescind its vote, although it's interesting to note that Orange County and Durham County already offer this benefit. (Note to legislators: it appears much more difficult to pass self-serving benefits during periods of economic difficulty. During boom times, folks don't tend to pay as much attention to government largess.)

One of the most concerning aspects of government growth is government's tendency to crowd out community-based initiatives. At one point, private organizations and communities of faith were the backbone for community safety nets. Recent studies suggest that in our era of big government, church attendance and involvement suffers.

Even more concerning, over the past eight years the Bush administration has worked to make churches and charities dependent on the federal government -- witness the creation of our White House Office of Faith Based and Community Initiatives. Featuring an amazing array of reports, newsletters, and conferences, the OFBCI celebrates high-profile opportunities to spend taxpayer dollars:

White House Gulf Coast Conference Explores Role of Nonprofits in Disaster Response and Preparedness

NEW ORLEANS, LA – On May 29, 2008, the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (OFBCI) kicked off a two-day Gulf Coast Conference on Disaster Relief and Preparedness, exploring ways to strengthen disaster recovery efforts through expanded partnerships with America's nonprofit sector. As part of National Hurricane Preparedness Week, the conference also emphasized the critical and increasing role of faith-based and community organizations (FBCOs), and their armies of volunteers, in response and rebuilding plans for future disasters.

President Bush to Spotlight Success of Faith-Based and Community Initiative at National Conference

On June 26, President George W. Bush delivered remarks at the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (OFBCI) "Innovations in Effective Compassion National Conference" in Washington, D.C.

Joined by members of the President's Cabinet, OFBCI Director Jay Hein and more than 1,000 public- and private-sector leaders, the Conference will explore and expand the ways the Faith-Based and Community Initiative is transforming government's approach to human need, in partnership with faith-based and community organizations, to solve problems from addiction and homelessness to malaria and HIV/AIDS.

How much does it cost to "spotlight success" with more than 1,000 public- and private-sector leaders? Are these events essential for organizations' charitable missions, and would they successfully attract funding if they were not funded by the taxpayer?

Here's an alternative hypothesis: if we allow Americans to keep more of their own earnings, and reduce the federal government's size and spending, there will be more resources available for community-based initiatives funded locally by accountable organizations. For example, most religious traditions embrace the concept of tithing, or regular charitable giving:

31 If a man redeems any of his tithe, he must add a fifth of the value to it. 32 The entire tithe of the herd and flock—every tenth animal that passes under the shepherd's rod—will be holy to the LORD. Leviticus 27:31-32

Is there more or less money available for local initiatives if the government takes 40-50% of our community's income? Furthermore, when the government's own policies result in the gradual erosion of our currency's purchasing power, are people concerned with their ability to buy food and gas more or less motivated towards charitable giving?

I believe the federal government has overstepped its Constitutional boundaries with its foray into funding "faith based and community initiatives." To the extent that churches and other civic organizations start receiving funds from the federal government, they cannot help but serve their new master: government, instead of the community.

Unfortunately, Sen. Barack Obama highlighted his desire to expand President Bush's flawed initiaitive just last week:

With an eye toward courting evangelical voters, Senator Barack Obama arrived here on Tuesday to present a plan to expand on President Bush’s program of investing federal money in religious-based initiatives that are intended to fight poverty and perform community aid work.

“Now, I know there are some who bristle at the notion that faith has a place in the public square,” Mr. Obama intends to say. “But the fact is, leaders in both parties have recognized the value of a partnership between the White House and faith-based groups.”

He thus embraced the heart of a program, established early in the Bush administration, that critics say blurs the constitutional separation of church and state. Mr. Obama made clear, however, that he would work to ensure that charitable groups receiving government funds be carefully monitored to prevent them from using the money to proselytize and to prevent any religion-based discrimination against potential recipients or employees.

That last sentence is particularly interesting, and illustrates the dangers of spiritual organizations dependent on the government. "Carefully monitored" churches are traditionally associated with oppressive totalitarian regimes as opposed to a constitutional republic.