Closer to the people?

“The government that is closest to the people governs best.” That sentiment was expressed recently by Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan, and it’s long been a staple of conservative political philosophy and of candidates who want federal programs to be taken over by state and local governments. But liberals embrace it in their own way when they talk about “participatory democracy” and the need for people to be able to make decisions about the issues that directly affect them.

The question is: what does it mean for government to be “closer” to people? Are citizens really closer to their state legislators and officials? Geographically, yes. But state and local officials can also be elusive and unresponsive—perhaps even more so than national officials, since there are fewer organizations and reporters covering their actions and holding them accountable. 

Most of us, if we pay attention to the news at all, are likely to know more about the debates and the lobbyists at work in Washington than we are about what’s going on in Springfield or Trenton.