Inherent Dignity
A speech on Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan, and Republican values
This was a speech given at the Milford Republican Party’s “Lincoln & Reagan” Dinner on April 17, 2025.
My fellow Americans and Republicans.
Thank you for this tremendous honor to address you tonight about not only Republican values — why we believe what we believe — but also this dinner’s namesakes, Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan: two of the greatest presidents, and national heroes, in American history. To be here now, standing before you and following in the line of other more prominent speakers of consequence is a privilege.
I also feel privileged — though not in the way the Left would use the term — because I wouldn’t be standing here today without the love, support, and wisdom of not only all of you over my past nearly six years as your representative on the Board of Education and Board of Aldermen — but more significantly my parents and siblings, who are here this evening. They demonstrated to me the importance, indeed, the duty of engaging with your local community. Too often, one can lament the challenges — or sometimes downright lunacy — of Hartford, Washington, D.C., or the world “out there.” Yet we cannot forget our neighbors next door or down the street who need our help and talents; the boldness to stand up for them by defending truth when others won’t; and the love to raise them from the depths of despair, leading them to hope in themselves, America, and even God.
But it is also strange to realize that my history with the Milford Republican Party extends back to handing out flyers and pamphlets with my siblings when my dad ran for Alderman more than 20 years ago. It was, frankly, the last thing a kid would want to do on a Saturday morning — but there were some M&Ms and sodas involved for the hard day’s work. So, hey, maybe M&Ms are a way to bring more people into our tent.
And also, growing up in the Fowler household, Lincoln and Reagan were mainstays. Literally my bedroom wall had a poster of Lincoln — who I used to call “Hebraham Blinkon” because I couldn’t pronounce his name right — and our stairwell had photos of my dad shaking hands with Reagan. But I think everyone in life needs to re-examine why they believe what they believe; why they admire whom they admire. And safe to say, after my own re-examination several years ago, Lincoln and Reagan are still two of my ideological and political heroes.
The reason I am a Republican — and always will be — is not simply for lowering taxes; eliminating burdensome regulations; equality under the law; promoting localism; meritocracy over equity; and protecting the most vulnerable in our society. Those are all good in and of themselves, but they wrangle with the human condition — and promote human flourishing — more wisely than the progressivism and wokeism imbibed in the Democratic Party.
If you will indulge me — and since I have the microphone — allow me to explain each and why we, as Republicans, believe in these principles.
FEWER TAXES
First off, fewer and/or lowering taxes means more disposable income to save and spend on your family, friends, a house, an apartment, a new appliance, or something else, which helps improve quality of life and is the lifeblood of a free market economy. More money and/or resources means less stress and anxiety over paying for the increasingly unaffordable items like a good home, a college degree, energy, and — during the Biden administration — even eggs. Every dollar earned is a means of self-governance — and every dollar stripped to fill government coffers also strips a person of that ability. And as DOGE has shown, the government has not been fiscally responsible with our valuable dollars.
Fewer taxes also means more money in your pocket to assist in charitable causes, which is vital to not only helping those in need and fostering a good willed society, but preventing the expansion of big government through mediating organizations. Local charities, nonprofits, clubs and associations provide an avenue for you and me to fulfill neighborly services that have been increasingly absorbed by the government as these societies dwindle. The Milford Oyster Festival is a prime victim: nowadays fewer people volunteer and, worse, fewer younger people replace the older generation. Thus there are fewer opportunities to engage with our community, where partisanship labels are put aside for a common mission: to help build civility, while exemplifying that we have the capacity to perform merciful, charitable acts without government involvement. These mediating associations are inherently American, one Alexis de Tocqueville in “Democracy in America,” greatly admired — but one that’s slipping before our very eyes.
Today, however, people confuse increased taxation as charity since money is going toward government-funded welfare programs — but an obligation is not charitable; in fact, it is naive to think so. An obligation dilutes and robs charity of its meaning. Charity is done out of the goodness of one’s own heart, which requires agency and the spirit or wherewithal that we have a duty to those of lesser means. As Reagan noted in 1986, philanthropy is defined as “affection for mankind” — taxation, therefore, is a calloused, dissociative way for people to convince themselves they are philanthropic, when in actuality, they are putting an arms’ length toward helping others. In other words, it’s someone else’s job to actually do the nitty gritty. Conversely, Pope Francis has said shepherds should “smell like the sheep”: in our own modest way, charity allows us to see human suffering and offers an opportunity to alleviate someone’s pain. Taxation not only makes everyone poorer and breeds fiscal irresponsibility, but removes the humanity from giving.
And what about those not paying their “fair share”? Truly, what does fair share mean? How will we know when the “affluent” — which during the Obama administration meant individuals making $200,000 — have paid enough in taxes? But the truth is these fair share proponents do not have a defined amount; worse, the government has an exorbitant unsated appetite. Just the other day, on Tax Day, Rep. Anne Hughes — a Democrat from Easton — was caught on a hot mic laughing, “I always tell the governor to tax my people. They won’t even notice.” This is saying the quiet part out loud. The government believes it is entitled to our hard-earned living, and does so thinking we won’t or don’t notice. But this has led to affordability hardships, especially in Connecticut. We have one of the highest tax burdens in the country; rank near the bottom for business climate and taxpayer return on investment; and, as a result, we have a high outbound migration. We’re paying more and receiving less in terms of quality statewide government services.
As Reagan rightly stated, “We don’t have deficits because people are taxed too little. We have deficits because big government spends too much.” So, despite what Rep. Hughes says, we — the people of Connecticut — do notice and will have something to say about that on a forthcoming Election Day.
As you and I know, economic strife is the root to many social ills, and those economically unstable societies are often highly taxed. One only needs to look at countries around the world like Venezuela, North Korea, the Sudan, Haiti — or throughout history. Would revolutions like in France or Russia have occurred if the economic livelihood of their overtaxed people had been better? In both, their citizens were starving simply for bread. Even in our own nation’s history, would the Founding Fathers have been convinced to chart a new course in human history if they had been fairly represented and fairly taxed?
FEWER REGULATIONS
Fewer regulations, meanwhile, leads to more economic growth and opportunity to start a business, thus more jobs and more taxpayers, which creates a more stable community. Look at Connecticut: we are one of the most highly regulated states in the nation — so it should be no surprise then why the Constitution State isn’t a hub for economic growth. Indeed, harsher economic climates actually split families and friends. Too many of my friends have left Connecticut in pursuit of economic wealth and mobility in other, more Republican, states; and I know you have people in your own lives that have done the same. Why do Democrats seem to fail to grasp that both fewer taxes and fewer regulations, when coupled together, stimulate economic prosperity? To borrow the Trump administration’s motto, it just seems common sense.
Moreover, fewer regulations also means a less intrusive and limited government, therefore protecting peoples’ civil liberties. A larger government, on the other hand, often leads to unelected bureaucrats wielding legislative, executive, and judicial powers, which, as James Madison wrote when “in the same hands…may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” Yet the rise of the administrative state, as we see today, is coupled with the rise of progressivism, which originates in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. One of its major champions in the United States was President Woodrow Wilson. In his 1887 paper, “The Study of Administration,” the future president bemoaned that “It is harder for democracy to organize administration than for monarchy” and there is “the error of trying to do too much by vote.” This progressive ethos underlies bureaucracy: that there are far too many opinions, and civil servants are constrained by the pesky public opinion to get any consequential work accomplished. However, the mere existence of many opinions — because no two minds have been or will ever be the same in history — is precisely the basis of the human condition and thus, why a republic is a good form of government. It respects opinions, and the ballot box offers a civil means of debating ideas. Conversely, an administrative state stokes privileged opinions. To borrow from George Orwell’s Animal Farm, “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”
Unfortunately, under his segregated administration, President Wilson expanded the bureaucratic state that would rapidly expand nearly twenty years later under Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal.
Yes, Founding Fathers like George Washington and Alexander Hamilton did want an effective government — one that not only promoted virtue, but also operated smoothly. Indeed, that’s why delegates met at the Constitutional Convention because the prior governing document, the Articles of Confederation, did not function well. But neither Washington nor Hamilton would condone Wilson and the progressive vision of granting more powers to bureaucrats because it directly contrasts with a republican government, one in which elected representatives are held accountable at the ballot box. The administrative state, meanwhile, is more shielded from the public and removal from office.
This administrative state, who concocts regulations, is also rife with an elitism imposing its stringent rules on those deemed “less” educated. One only needs to remember a few short years ago during the pandemic when masking and six feet of separation was dictated by the powers that be. And these administrators found it permissible that liquor stores continue operating, while closing down schools and churches. Where do their priorities lay?
This elite class infringes on individual liberties, while flaunting power that the legislative branches around the country have relinquished for more than a century. And it has been exposed by DOGE and Elon Musk to have funneled our taxpayer dollars to questionable causes like USAID, overseas DEI and LGBTQ initiatives, among other programs instead of on the homefront. If one spends money on what they value, then there is a sizable fracture between the American peoples’ and the administrative state’s priorities.
As National Review founder and famed Connecticut resident, William F. Buckley Jr., asserted, “I would rather be governed by the first 2,000 people in the Boston telephone directory than the entire faculty of Harvard.” Ditto Bill! Because who would want to be governed by the former Harvard president and confirmed plagiarist, Claudine Gay. (Who Harvard still employs by by the way.)
EQUALITY UNDER THE LAW
Third, equality under the law enshrines justice — that everyone is subject to the same rules. As people, it’s in our nature to seek justice. We long for justice. And we know when justice is not blind. For instance, during Donald Trump’s impeachments and trials, Democrats touted “no man is above the law.” In America, that should be true. But the weaponization of the judicial system — coupled with activist judges — has bred an acrimonious society, one that can be summarized by the idiom “rules for thee, but not for me.” After the 2020 riots — sorry, mostly peaceful protests — do we believe that justice was adjudicated fairly? Even in Trump’s circumstance with the classified documents, Joe Biden was caught doing the same thing, albeit leaving documents near his Corvette: and he was not charged because he was “an elderly man with poor memory.”
Equality under the law can even be extended to the prevention of illegal immigration. Progressives have long promoted open borders under the banner of social justice, charity, and peace. They wave Emma Lazarus’ classic poem, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free” — which is marked on the Statue of Liberty. Yes, America has been a safe harbor for refugees and immigrants for hundreds of years, seeking economic opportunity and escaping persecution. And we strive to be a city upon a hill — a role model to the rest of the world. But a country must also have sovereignty and the rule of law to survive.
We are not denying these individuals — or anyone — a path to citizenship. In fact, the more the merrier. Truthfully, America’s beauty is that anyone can choose to become an American. However, I cannot become a Frenchman, an Englishmen or Japanese — no matter how hard I try. That is because our citizenship is not necessarily tied to the caste or soil on which we were born alone; but adhering to the principles embedded in one of the greatest documents ever conceived, the United States Constitution.
Lincoln and Reagan loved the Constitution. This rule of law separates America from the rest of the world. As Lincoln said in 1858, prior to his presidency, “[The prosperity of the United States] is not the result of accident. It has a philosophic cause. Without the Constitution and the Union, we could not have attained the result.” Reagan, meanwhile, once said, “Almost all the world’s constitutions are documents in which governments tell the people what their privileges are. Our Constitution is a document in which we the people tell the government what it is allowed to do.”
The Constitution is our nation’s heart and character; the playing field by which one can better themselves and achieve the American Dream. It recognizes this fundamental truth that God does not govern the universe and human hearts by sheer force, but through the gift of free will. It is not a barrier to temporal and spiritual prosperity, but an open door, a declaration that an individual has the right and capacity to live freely because he or she is a human being.
But even doors need walls. It needs a structure to stand and form its shape. Yet Democrats criticize Republicans for having cold hearts to those seeking asylum, closing the border, and even deporting people. Indeed, our consciences should move us to not ignore the poor, the lame, the injured, and the distressed who are on our doorstep. However, we must ask ourselves: has skirting the rule of law, like in the case of illegal immigration, promoted good will? Does it actually benefit Americans — and what are we telling those law-abiding immigrants who followed the rules on their path to citizenship?
Meanwhile, adversarial countries, like China and Venezuela, have exploited our nation’s good will by shipping in drugs, gang violence, and sex trafficking across our borders that inflict harm on our own people. Thousands of children have been lost — thousands — to God knows what evil. How is that compassion?
In Connecticut, the state has reportedly spent $1.3 billion on illegal immigration services like medical care, education, shelter, and even incarceration. That’s $1.3 billion in valuable taxpayer funds that could have gone to benefit Americans struggling to make ends meet. Just like in the judicial system, a country’s heart must also have an order to how it loves. As Vice President J.D. Vance pointed out, quoting the Augustinian/Thomistic concept of “ordo amoris,” we have a duty first to our family, then neighbor, then community, then country, and then the rest of the world.
Preserving the rule of law, then, is crucial to constructing a civil society. If a nation and its citizenry abides by no set of rules, the road leads to despotism, fear, social and economic strife, and, in the worst cases, the slaughter of millions. Again, one only needs to look at the 20th century — between fascism and communism — to understand the magnitude of “equality under the law.”
LOCALISM
Fourth, as Republicans, we believe in localism rather than relying on big government because, as Reagan so rightly and succinctly stated, “Government is not the solution to the problem; government is the problem.” At Yankee Institute, my employer, we champion localism because we believe that “Decisions are best made by the unit of government closest to the people whose lives are affected by the laws that are put in place.” Doesn’t that make sense? The more localized a problem, the better equipped we are to address it. Yet the more we relinquish to government, the fewer freedoms we preserve for ourselves. There is a spiritual beauty to self-reliance embedded in this Republican principle that thwarts the rise of government social programs, increased taxation, and even authoritarianism. As the Bible tells us, “Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, he eats for life.” This is inherently true: Republicans understand for a person to flourish and exceed their own expectations, handouts are a barrier. A safety net is one thing. We do have a Judeo-Christian duty to help our neighbor. But to coddle and stoke dependency, which government is known to do, is another. As Reagan once joked that the “nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.” There is always a little bit of truth in jest, and definitely in the Gipper’s quick wit. For instance, look at Lyndon B. Johnson’s “Great Society,” can we honestly assess that it’s actually improved the lives of our countrymen? One cannot live in a house of good intentions, which the government has time-and-time again promised, but failed to deliver to the detriment of civil society.
MERITOCRACY
We also believe that meritocracy — not equity — is a crucial cornerstone for a democratic republic. No one is entitled to the same outcome. Yes, in God’s eyes, we are all made in His likeness; and, if you are a believer, we will be judged albeit equally, but not equitably. Indeed, throughout our daily lives, we either can choose heaven or choose Hell. We can choose charity or a hardness of heart. Courage or fear. Resiliency or victimhood. Right or wrong. Two people who exemplify American meritocracy are Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan. Both were born into poverty, Lincoln more so than Reagan, and endured career setbacks, bouts of depression, and even electoral defeats; yet through willpower, ambition, and the desire to better themselves, they persevered, rising to the ranks of the highest office in the nation.
During his 1860 speaking tour in Connecticut, Lincoln — who was not yet a presidential candidate — stopped in New Haven. In opposing slavery, he emphasized the lack of meritocracy in the evil industry, saying:
“One of the reasons why I am opposed to Slavery is just here. What is the true condition of the laborer? I take it that it is best for all to leave each man free to acquire property as fast as he can. Some will get wealthy. I don’t believe in a law to prevent a man from getting rich; it would do more harm than good. So while we do not propose any war on capital, we do wish to allow the humblest man an equal chance to get rich with everybody else. When one starts poor, as most do in the race of life, free society is such that he knows he can better his condition; he knows that there is no fixed condition of labor, for his whole life. …I want every man to have the chance — and I believe a black man is entitled to it — in which he can better his condition — when he may look forward and hope to be a hired laborer this year and the next, work for himself afterward, and finally hire men to work for him! That is the true system.”
We should take heed of Lincoln’s words. Merit stokes creativity, innovation, and improved quality of life — and an improved quality of life for future generations within a family. Equity, on the other hand, propagates division and an uninspired people. Think about it: if everyone received the same lot, no matter the work ethic, then we have manufactured a ceiling for our civilization. Equity, in an American context, has also forcibly bent our society toward the sins of the past, while suffocating citizens into a ‘cancel culture’ reminiscent of the Cultural Revolution in China, which pitted neighbor against neighbor to catastrophic ends.
Republicans believe in no ceiling. There is no limit to imagination, prosperity, and success — and truthfully, a rising tide raises all boats. In the end, you get what you earn, and you should keep what you’ve earned.
DEFENDING THE VULNERABLE
Throughout its history, the Republican Party has also been conscious — and protective of — the most vulnerable in our society. Lincoln was the great emancipator because he believed that America was “conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal,” as he stated eloquently in the Gettysburg Address. He made the ultimate sacrifice for this principle on, coincidentally, “Good Friday” 160 years ago. More than a hundred years later, Reagan labeled the Soviet Union as an “evil empire” because it crushed and terrorized the human spirit, trapping millions behind communism’s Iron Curtain. It was an evil empire that needed to be defeated — and Reagan’s boldness and courage led to the Soviet Union’s eventual collapse. Even today, the Republican Party has predominantly been one that seeks to protect life from conception to natural death, while the Democratic Party — once the party of “safe, legal, and rare” — champions abortion under the guise of reproductive rights, which has claimed more than 63 million lives since Roe v. Wade. As Mother Teresa once stated, “Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use violence to get what they want. That is why the greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion.” Think about our political divisions today and their origins: even though American politics has been rife with partisanship since the early days of the republic, the life issue has sowed more animosity in our judicial process — from Robert Bork being “borked” courtesy of Democrats Ted Kennedy and Joe Biden to the Brett Kavanaugh media circus. What were the Democrats concerned about? That the Supreme Court adhere to Roe v. Wade. This debate has only festered in American society at-large.
To his credit, although with some shortcomings, Donald Trump has been a leader on this issue, like signing executive orders to end the use of federal taxpayer dollars to fund or promote elective abortions. I know this is a tough discussion or moral quandary for some, but the Republican Party is not a Malthusian one: as Reagan said, “I’ve noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born.”
Ultimately, life matters. After all, in the Declaration of Independence, there is a reason why “life” is first and foremost. None of the other principles and rights matter if one is not alive.
INHERENT DIGNITY
Woven throughout all of these principles is the core of the Republican Party’s platform, and one Lincoln, Reagan, and to the present day recognize: that every person has an inherent dignity.
Our Republican Party was founded on this principle. On March 24, 1854, nearly 50 people, formerly of the Whig Party, met in the Little White Schoolhouse in Ripon, Wisconsin, to establish a new political party to oppose and stop the spread of slavery. I wonder what they would think about the party today — and how it has grown and continues to be the champion of every individual’s inherent dignity. It’s worth reflecting on: there are more people in this room than there were to form the party we have inherited. And think of the consequences of history without those 50 people — whose names are largely forgotten to time and in the history books — gathering together because they saw how the government failed to adhere to the inalienable rights gifted to us by Almighty God.
INHERITORS AND BESTOWERS
Large movements do have humble origins.
This Saturday, we remember our forefathers — those volunteer Minutemen in Lexington and Concord — who 250 years ago signaled with the “shot heard around the world” the beginnings of the greatest nation ever conceived in human history.
Lincoln and Reagan were inspired by those Minutemen and our nation’s forefathers like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, John Adams, to name a few. Arguably, no other era in U.S. history has had such a confluence of ‘mighty men’ wrestling intellectually and philosophically to establish a new government, all while fighting against Great Britain, one of world history’s most dominating empires.
But Washington could not fight against the British forces alone. What about the common man? The common soldier? A man like Joseph Plumb Martin. Martin may not be as well-known, but at 15 years old, he joined the Connecticut militia and his service spanned seminal events in the war, from New York to Valley Forge to Monmouth to Yorktown. For seven hard years he battled against starvation, the bitter cold and harsh conditions, as well as the harrowing British cannonballs and gunfire.
Why bring him up? Martin was from Milford — and his witness, shared in a memoir, serves as the basis for historical research on the life of the ordinary Revolutionary War soldier. Even through the trials and tribulations, Martin kept soldiering on because he knew what the war was about — freedom.
In America, we have understood that true freedom lies not in the government, but in self-governance. There is more to our existence than “striving after the wind” or in materialism. The best of America is in pursuing ‘happiness’ — that being justice, peace, marriage, raising a family, duty to community, and even our dreams. This legacy has been found in the millions upon millions of people who journeyed to America, some with mere cents in their pockets, to build a better life.
And those who “deny” this freedom to others, as Lincoln said, “deserve it not for themselves; and under a just God, can not long retain it.” He and Reagan, as some of the greatest liberators in human history, knew this all too well.
Most of us will not be remembered by history. Even within our families, our great-great-grandchildren may fail at trying to recall our names. Trust me: most of us will slip into obscurity. But not our actions. The fight for liberty and goodness we strive for today — that being the inherent dignity of every person — will reverberate throughout the centuries, like that “shot” at Lexington and Concord 250 years ago. It will be visible, not only in law, but in our civil society: in our communities, streets, businesses, schools, farms, parks, shorelines, forests and so on.
And it is a fight. We are engaged in a spiritual warfare for the nation’s soul. As Reagan so rightly stated: “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction,” and that it “must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.” Men and women have shed blood to preserve that freedom. Lincoln, again in the Gettysburg Address, told the crowd gathered that day that, by the soldiers’ deaths, we should “highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain, that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”
We cannot take this task lightly or for granted. It would be hubris to believe that we are invulnerable to the forces of darkness, seeking to rip away freedom and rob our kinsmen of their dignity. If history provides any lessons, nations have both risen to glorious heights and crumbled into the ash-heap. Lincoln and Reagan took this task to heart: and as Republicans, we should follow their lead, and inculcate this into our hearts while in our homes, board rooms, meetings, at charity events and out on the campaign trail.
This may seem daunting, especially as the election season is upon us that will be a tough battle — and due to the fact that we are in the minority on the Board of Aldermen, the Board of Education, and Planning & Zoning. It may even lure us to despair.
But you and I don’t exist in a vacuum. Like the Apostles in the upper room, or the Founding Fathers in Independence Hall, or our Republican forefathers at the Little White Schoolhouse, the winds of change and human flourishing have been ignited in tinier and harsher circumstances, yet they have proven consequential to the betterment of humanity.
Tonight, we are also in a relatively small room. But we are not only inheritors, we are bestowers. We should not hold our freedoms cheap. We seek for a brighter, more hopeful Milford — a city where our families, friends, and neighbors can grow and thrive; not burdened under the weight of a government that crushes the human spirit. We seek a better education for our students because we understand, as exemplified in Lincoln’s humble life, that a good education breaks the cycle of poverty and allows them to achieve their God-given potential. And we seek to preserve a community spirit that truly has a “big heart” — one oriented toward love of neighbor and the common good.
This upcoming election, we all will have a role to play: from running for office to donating to knocking on doors to putting up signs to making phone calls and so on. No doubt, we will feel the drudgery from time-to-time, coming face-to-face with the question “well why am I doing this.” In those times, think about Lincoln and Reagan or even Martin, and heed their example. We should be filled with pride — and even rejoice — that we are the guardians of liberty; that we are in the position to effect change and for the better. And we can soldier on with confidence that, as Republicans, we are standing for truth, for inalienable rights, for America, for the freedoms we cherish.
Our neighbors today and those yet unborn are counting on us, in our own humble way, to keep aflame the light of liberty. That is who we are fighting for. That is why we believe what we believe. And, if we hold true to our principles, that is why we will win in November. Never forget: the actions you and I undertake are truly important, more than we will ever know until we have shaken this mortal coil and meet God. So, let us be united in purpose. Let us bury our hatchets. Let us be optimistic. Let us love well by willing the good of the other. Be a happy warrior. Be bold. Stay true to heart. Be a Republican.
May God bless you, Milford, and the United States of America.