The lion will lay down with the lamb, it's a fact -

When the lamb's in the lion's digestive tract.

John Sine

Writer and political blogger

In his response to my most recent column last week, Eric Mathison wrote: "We should decide what government can and should do then monitor it closely."

I couldn't agree more. But the devil, as they say, is in the details, and we will find little common ground in defining the proper role of government.

Our Founding Fathers, who won the War for Independence and later framed the Constitution, led a conservative revolution to secure "certain unalienable Rights" and to limit the scope and power of government.

The Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution impose clear limitations on the role of the federal government:

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

And, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

Liberals, including those like Eric who attempt to camouflage themselves with the Progressive label, see things differently. They usually accept government intervention as the proper solution to society's problems.

The fatal flaw in this utopian concept, however, is that its inevitable end if left unchecked is total control by the state. It is a "road to serfdom."

Before continuing, let me make one thing perfectly clear. Almost all liberals I know, including Eric, are good people who mean well and care about their communities, states and nation. They are good friends, neighbors and colleagues.

But as Mary Alice Cole, my high school typing teacher, reminded us daily, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

Eric also said, "We should pay as we go" - after faulting certain borrow and spend practices of Presidents Reagan and Bush II.

President Reagan, however, got squeezed when Democrats reneged on their part of a political bargain.

On the other hand, conservatives felt abandoned by W during his first six years in office as non-military spending - approved by a Republican congress - escalated and he never exercised presidential veto power.

Runaway Republican spending combined with scandals, not the war, made it possible for the Democrats to take back control of both houses of Congress in 2006.

(I will withhold comment on Eric's passing criticism of American operations in the Iraqi Theater in the war against Islamo-fascism, which was a focus of his concerns about deficit spending, except to suggest that he review the success of the surge in Iraq during the past year.)

But while Eric pointed a "pay as we go" finger at President Bush, he overlooked a looming fiscal problem much closer to home.

His complaint was that I "focus all the supposed sins" of the Democratic monopoly in Olympia on Sen. Karen Keiser, D-Des Moines, because her new, big-spending programs "will not be adequately funded."

Yet Democratic Gov. Chris Gregoire recently urged state legislators to "batten down the hatches" on state spending. Then last week, the State Revenue Forecast Council predicted a $423 million decline in revenues.

If this trend continues, the governor will have turned a $2.1 billion surplus when she took office into a $1 billion deficit in less than four years.

"Gov. Gregoire spent taxpayer dollars like a drunken sailor," Washington State Republican Party Chairman Luke Esser declared. "Actually, that's an insult to drunken sailors - drunken sailors at least only spend their own money."

Republican legislators cautioned in 2005 and again last year against basing new spending on anticipated, rather than actual, economic growth.

Their prophetic warnings fell on deaf ears among the Democratic majority, whose spending sprees that ignored the reality of economic cycles now place Washington taxpayers at greater risk.

As do other liberals (a/k/a progressives), Eric blames revenue shortfalls on Tim Eyman, who spoke up for ordinary taxpayers after lawmakers in Olympia didn't, and a general Republican "paranoia" about taxes.

This raises a question that Democrats overlook but voters should answer before November's election: Whose money is Olympia spending? Check your pockets before answering.

The views of Ralph Nichols are his own, and do not necessarily reflect those of Robinson Newspapers. He can be reached at ralphn@robinsonnews.com or 206-388-1857.