MAKING BIG BROTHER BIGGER?

A recent Gallup poll bears out what has been apparent since Sept. 11:
Americans are showing profound trust in President George W. Bush, his
Cabinet and his prosecution of the war in Afghanistan. The poll, conducted
earlier this month, shows 87 percent of respondents approve of the job
President Bush is doing.

Also getting high marks are Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, at 82
percent approval; Tom Ridge, homeland security director, at 67 percent;
and, to the consternation of the political left, Attorney General John
Ashcroft, at 76 percent.

Some have confused strong support for military and police action to fight
the war against terrorists, however, with a blind call for a return to big
government.

U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., wrote in a recent piece for The
Washington Post that a second "New Deal is upon us. The president can
either lead the charge or be run over by it."

Sen. Schumer argues that America must be single-minded to defeat terrorism
and "only the federal government" can bring about that unity. He declares
that the era of shrinking government is over and salutes the alleged return
to a time when Americans will gladly "cede more authority and dollars to
Washington," not only to protect our borders but to do things like "shore
up our public health systems."

Before tax-and-spend zealots get too mischievous in their plans to make Big
Brother bigger, though, they should look closely at what it is that
Americans are applauding in their government. Namely, our nation
successfully is prosecuting a war on a massive terrorist network in a
distant land.

The patriotic hymns making a comeback these days cannot rationally be seen
as calls to expand the welfare state, drive companies out of business
through excessive regulation, or control political speech through
unconstitutional efforts like "campaign finance reform."

Liberals have never really gotten the point about bloated government.
Americans do not mind the federal government handling its constitutionally
mandated duties. The last thing we want is anarchy, and we can be downright
giddy about our leaders when they're behaving themselves and doing things
like making sure we have an adequate defense and that property and other
rights are protected.

But we rightly are disgusted when big-government opportunists equate our
admiration for the brave soldier entering a cave in Afghanistan with
affection for a lethargic bureaucrat doling out cash for obscene "art" or
welfare to citizens who could help themselves.

Government should be most popular when it does what the Constitution
directs, and avoids what the Constitution rightly prohibits.