Column: Robin Brown, My Point of View

What exactly is ‘big government’? With the state of Minnesota billions of dollars in debt and the United States trillions of dollars in debt, one might claim that “big government” is a distinctly financial issue.

Government has a purpose that benefits society. It provides many services more efficiently than individuals can do so alone, such as national defense, police and fire protection, safe roads and bridges, public schools and aid to the elderly, poor or disabled. Still, at some point government is considered small and at another point its financial priorities and therefore obligations increase to a point that it is considered big. Defining government by what it spends is one way to frame the discussion, but it is not the only way — and certainly not a comprehensive way.

The phrase “big government” carries deep implications but is often used very narrowly. It not only exists when governments commit to spend beyond their logical ability to pay but also takes place when legislators pass laws beyond a logical commitment of enforcement.

Generally, that type of legislation has the added insult of intruding into the most private and personal areas of our lives. It comes in the form of rules and regulations that:

• Allow monitoring of our phones, e-mail and Internet use without a warrant.

• Prevent adults from marrying whom they choose and therefore denying them the rights that other married couples enjoy

• Dictate the most private decisions a family can make

Whether we are referring to one’s legal right to choose to carry a pregnancy full term, a constitutionally protected right for 38 years, or an adult couple’s right to marry whomever they choose, which is legal in a handful of states, we are talking about areas in our lives that reach far beyond the scope of small government.

Small government would never reach into our doctor’s offices and into the very bed one shares with one’s life partner. Only big government is guilty of such offenses.

Regardless of one’s position (pro-life or pro-choice), no one takes the issue of abortion lightly. With that said, consider the following questions should Roe v. Wade ever be overturned.

Who are the law breakers?

How do law breakers pay their debt to society?

What methods do you endorse to enforce the law?

How much money should government spend for enforcement, prosecution, incarceration or other means of restitution?

Legislation has consequences and each of the previous questions must be seriously addressed before such legislation is brought forward.

Over the past four years several members of the Minnesota Legislature have proposed anti-choice legislation in the form of amendments to health bills, budget bills and government operations bills. The determination of some legislators to turn back time for women’s reproductive rights is strong, but is it wise?

An expansion of this type of legislation would impose big government more deeply into our pocket books and more intrusively into our personal lives. Personal decisions are best made by those most directly affected by those decisions and in the case of reproductive health care that means the mother with the support of those she most trusts.

What is the alternative? Assume Roe v. Wade is repealed, and it becomes illegal for a woman to obtain the safe, legal termination of a pregnancy. Back-alley abortions that were a reality previous to the 1973 Supreme Court decision would surely return in some form, but there are legal and financial consequences as well. Lawbreakers would need to be arrested and prosecuted. Offenders would include mothers, fathers, nurses or doctors directly involved with the outlawed procedure. Accomplices also breaking the law may include grown children, friends, family members and/or clergy.

There is certainly precedence in other areas of law to suggest that any or all of those mentioned could be found guilty. And once arrested and tried at expense to the state, what restitution is the public willing to tolerate? Should both the man and woman be sentenced to a prison term, and if so, for how long and at what cost?

The consequences sound extreme because they are.

But citizens and legislators should be able to answer the questions that would define such an expanse of government power. In a perfect world, there would be no unwanted pregnancies. Babies would be born to committed parents, emotionally and financially prepared to raise healthy, happy and well-adjusted children.

With that said, we must protect the private lives of law-abiding adults. Big government should not be allowed to intrude into the most private parts of our lives, making choices that are best entrusted to the people directly involved and their God.

Robin Brown is a former District 27A representative, teacher at Albert Lea High School and a member of Freeborn County DFL Party.