Letters to the editor Nov. 16
A delicate balance
The genius of the U.S. Constitution lies in its ability to thread a delicate needle between two economic extremes: the inevitable failure of communism and the corrosive dangers of unchecked corporate capitalism.
The Constitution, ratified in 1787, was meticulously crafted by the framers to establish “free enterprise” as the bedrock of both individual liberty and collective economic prosperity. The framers, though not economists in the modern sense, understood from history and human nature that liberty cannot survive in a system where either the state monopolizes all economic power, or where private monopolies overwhelm the political process. Instead, they designed a framework where free enterprise — the ability of individuals to own property, pursue opportunity and reap the rewards of their labor — serves as the cornerstone of liberty and prosperity.
Communism, as later articulated by Marx, sought to abolish private property in the name of equality. The framers recognized that such a concentration of power in the state inevitably leads to tyranny, because whoever controls production controls people’s lives. The Constitution directly resists this by enshrining protections for property in the Fifth Amendment, guaranteeing that no person shall be deprived of “life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”
At the same time, the framers also feared aristocracy and monopoly — whether landed elites of Europe or, in modern terms, giant corporate capitalism. James Madison warned against “the overbearing majority” and concentrated factions, recognizing that concentrated economic power could distort democracy as surely as a king’s decree. To counter this, the Constitution built a system of checks and balances, separation of powers, and ultimately, the authority of Congress to regulate commerce “among the several states.” This was not to crush enterprise, but to prevent its perversion into oligarchy.
By design the Bill of Rights, alongside the Commerce Clause, creates both the breathing space for individuals to prosper and the guardrails to keep prosperity from collapsing into exploitation. Yet, the design’s success hinges on vigilance. The framers anticipated amendments and judicial interpretation to address evolving threats, such as antitrust laws later enacted under the Sherman Act (1890).
This balance is crumbling. Mega corporations are monopolizing everything from basic commerce, to the family farm. Escalating property taxes and overregulation are burdening home owners and potential home owners. Small businesses, in particular, face disproportionate barriers unable to absorb regulatory costs like large corporations. This dynamic concentrates economic power, distorts markets, and erodes property rights.
Most all of us hate Communism. But, the next time you hear the praises of “capitalism,” think twice.
— William Lincoln, Lakeside
Economic advice
In 1997, then Gov. Marc Racicot and his cabal passed legislation to deregulate the electrical power industry in Montana all in the name of free market competition based upon a premise that competition among power generators would lower prices for customers.
Shortly thereafter, the Montana Power Company closed, which wiped out thousands of jobs and pensions, and thousands of people lost their investments in this company.
The promise of lower rates and free market competition never materialized and in 2007 the state Legislature passed a reregulation bill. The deregulation debacle resulted in significant economic disruption in Montana and electricity prices remain higher than before the policy change.
Mr. Racicot is the last person I would listen to about tariffs, free markets, lost jobs, higher unemployment and slower economic growth.
— Mark Schwager, Kalispell