Estimated Time to Read: 6 minutes
In the modern era, government overreach has emerged as a pervasive threat to individual liberty, manifesting through excessive regulations, bureaucratic expansions, and interventions that infringe upon personal freedoms and economic autonomy. This phenomenon is not confined to distant authoritarian regimes but is evident in deep-red states, including Texas, where well-intentioned policies often evolve into mechanisms of control rather than restraint.
Drawing from the insights of classical liberal thinkers like Milton Friedman, Friedrich Hayek, and Frédéric Bastiat, alongside contemporary analysis from Texas Policy Research (TPR), we explore how government overreach undermines liberty, with particular attention to Texas, long viewed as the tip of the spear for limited government, and the implications this drift holds for the nation at large.
Lessons From Classical Thinkers
To understand modern government overreach, it is essential to revisit the foundational critiques offered by economists and philosophers who warned against unchecked state power. Frédéric Bastiat, in his seminal essay The Law (1850), argued that the proper role of government is to protect life, liberty, and property. When the state exceeds this mandate, it engages in what Bastiat called “legal plunder,” using the law to redistribute resources in ways that benefit some at the expense of others.
Bastiat illustrated this danger through parables such as the broken window fallacy, demonstrating how the visible benefits of government spending obscure unseen costs, including lost opportunities for private investment and innovation. In today’s context, this critique applies to expansive welfare programs, corporate subsidies, and regulatory regimes that distort markets and reward political favoritism. Bastiat’s warning that “the state is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else” remains strikingly relevant.
Building on these ideas, Friedrich Hayek argued that central planning and excessive government intervention inevitably erode freedom because they require coercion to impose uniform outcomes on diverse individuals. Hayek cautioned that even democratic governments could drift toward authoritarianism when collective goals are elevated above personal liberty. This concern resonates in an era of regulatory sprawl, where unelected agencies wield quasi-legislative authority with minimal accountability to voters.
Milton Friedman further dissected the problem by explaining how government failures arise from concentrated benefits and dispersed costs. Special interests have strong incentives to lobby for expansions of government power, while the broader public bears the long-term costs. Friedman contended that voluntary exchange within free markets promotes prosperity and liberty more effectively than state mandates, noting that inefficient programs persist not because they work, but because entrenched bureaucracies protect them.
Put simply, liberty thrives when government is restrained, and individuals are free to pursue their own ends without undue interference.
Government Overreach in Texas: Local and Federal Battles
Texas is often celebrated as a bastion of economic opportunity and personal freedom, yet it is not immune to the pressures of expanding government power. Texas Policy Research is dedicated to providing legislative insight and analysis grounded in liberty principles, and its work has documented numerous instances where local, state, and federal actions threaten those principles. This trend has become increasingly evident through legislation passed during the 89th Texas Legislature (2025) and constitutional amendments approved in the November 2025 election.
At the local level, TPR has highlighted how municipalities and local entities frequently overstep their authority, imposing regulations that burden businesses and restrict individual choice. For example, in its analysis of Senate Bill 15 from the 89th Legislature, TPR examined how the bill limits restrictive municipal zoning practices in large cities by curbing excessive minimum lot sizes and design mandates that inhibit smaller, more affordable housing options. While controversial, the legislation reflects a response to local regulatory overreach that has constrained housing supply and economic access.
Similarly, House Bill 2844 established a uniform statewide licensing system for mobile food vendors, replacing fragmented local permitting schemes with a single state-issued license. Texas Policy Research noted that the bill reduces regulatory barriers for small businesses by curtailing the micromanagement embedded in many local ordinances. These positions align with the organization’s broader view that unchecked local authority can undermine free enterprise and property rights, as reflected in its support for reforms such as Senate Bill 38, which sought to streamline eviction procedures and limit local judicial overrides.
At the state level, TPR has also raised concerns about overreach in areas intersecting with federal policy and constitutional protections. In its analysis of Senate Bill 2420, the App Store Accountability Act, the organization criticized the bill’s statewide age verification requirements, parental consent mandates, and regulatory burdens placed on app stores and software developers. Texas Policy Research argued that the bill substitutes government judgment for parental responsibility, expands state control over private enterprise, and risks chilling innovation in Texas’s growing digital economy. The organization recommended a no vote, citing the bill’s potential to burden small Texas-based firms and to regulate lawful speech under the guise of child protection. The subsequent federal court injunction on First Amendment grounds reinforced these concerns.
In the education space, TPR’s review of Senate Bill 12 highlighted similar tensions. While the bill aimed to codify parental rights in response to perceived federal and institutional overreach, it did so by layering new enforcement mechanisms, penalties, and oversight structures that risk expanding bureaucracy rather than reducing it. Once again, a policy designed to restrain government influence paradoxically relied on additional government power to achieve its goals.
These Texas-specific examples illustrate a recurring pattern. Policies introduced as narrow fixes often expand into broader systems of control, gradually eroding the decentralized governance model that has fueled Texas’s prosperity.
National and Global Implications
The trends visible in Texas mirror broader national developments, where federal agencies increasingly impose uniform standards that disregard regional differences and local conditions. Expanding authority exercised by agencies such as the EPA, IRS, and DOJ raises familiar concerns about accountability, constitutional limits, and the long-term consequences of centralized power.
Conclusion: Reclaiming Liberty Through Restraint
Government overreach poses a serious and growing threat to individual liberty, in Texas and beyond. The warnings offered by Bastiat, Hayek, and Friedman underscore a consistent lesson: freedom erodes not through sudden authoritarianism, but through gradual expansions of state power justified by good intentions.
By supporting efforts such as those undertaken by Texas Policy Research to scrutinize legislation and challenge excess, Texans can push back against this drift. Preserving liberty requires policy reforms that prioritize individual rights, free enterprise, and limited government over bureaucratic expansion. Texas has long claimed a leadership role in defending freedom. Whether it continues to earn that reputation will depend on its willingness to embrace restraint rather than control.
Texas Policy Research relies on the support of generous donors across Texas.
If you found this information helpful, please consider supporting our efforts! Thank you!
