Tag: choice

Categories
general freedom moral hazard nannyism responsibility too much government

The $659,000 Non-Question

driver's license, voting, registration, paternalism, nanny state, voters, democracy, choice, freedom

The so-​called “Motor Voter” law of 1993 created a national mandate: when people obtain their drivers’ licenses at the Department of Motor Vehicles, ask them if they’d also like to register to vote. 

The federal mandate is perhaps heavy-​handed, but the underlying idea has merit.

Now a new idea is gaining ground, taking the notion (nudge, nudge) a step further. Let’s not bother asking people if they want to sign up to vote, the proposal runs. Government should simply register them. Without asking.

It is a form of paternalism.

“It flips the presumption, where right now they ask you if want to be registered,” argues D.C. Council member Charles Allen. “Instead of that, we’re just going to go ahead and get you registered, and that absolutely helps enfranchise voters.”

“Lawmakers in 32 states have introduced measures in the last year to automatically register drivers to vote,” reports the Washington Post.

Some folks contend there isn’t much difference between asking if someone wants to register and registering them without asking. Well, if there isn’t much difference, why spend the $659,000 that Washington, D.C. officials estimate it will cost over the next four years for their new “don’t‑ask” program. 

Of course, there is a difference in the two policies: sort of like between offering people something to eat and force-​feeding them. 

Some Americans have no desire to vote or be registered. It is surely no business of any state or local government to act as if their preferences don’t count.

And what good are a bunch of names on a voter list if they aren’t interested? Is someone going to vote for them?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

 

Categories
ideological culture media and media people nannyism national politics & policies privacy responsibility too much government

Women and Men for Life

March for Life, Women's March, abortion, choice, pro-life

At Townhall on Sunday, I applauded the Women’s March on Washington for being peaceful, despite Madonna’s F‑bomb laden speech, culminating with her daydream of “blowing up the White House.”

We’ll never know how many more folks marched in that much-​heralded event than attended last weekend’s pro-​life march, because the mainstream media did not pay enough attention to the later, inconvenient-​to-​their-​narrative event, and crowd-​counters didn’t count.

The two marches did “intersect” (figuratively) when a pro-​life group was kicked out as a “partner” to the women’s march.

“If you want to come to the march you are coming with the understanding that you respect a woman’s right to choose [abortion],” declared Linda Sarsour, one of four chairwomen for the women’s march, who was described by the New York Times as “a Brooklyn-​born Palestinian-​American Muslim racial justice and civil-​rights activist.”

In its favor, the pro-​life march, anti-​celebrating the 44th year since the Roe v. Wade decision, had far more tasteful placards — despite the fact that pro-​life protesters are often remembered for grisly signs picturing aborted fetuses. I particularly liked a sign held by a young women, reading:

“We are having a clump of cells.” — [said] No One Ever

Speaking of young people, Slate magazine reported that “the demographic outlook for the pro-​life movement looks anything but bleak,” citing a 2015 poll wherein “52 percent of millennials said the label ‘pro-​life’ describes them somewhat or very well.”

Remember, the pro-​life movement has been marching all these years not to secure government benefits for themselves, but to protect others.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

 

Categories
education and schooling

Private School Choice Works

Vouchers Work

Private school choice is “in,” writes Patrick Wolf. “Far from being rare and untested, private school choice policies are an integral part of the fabric of American education policy.”

Now, these “new ideas” really upset some folks. I’m not one of them. School choice is greater freedom.

Freedom works.

Public schooling, on the other hand, is based on very different principles — and principals. It’s no wonder that a system based on compulsion (taxes, attendance, etc.) tends to have so much trouble performing well: it’s not the forced sector of the economy that booms.

Enter school choice. As long as kids must be forced to “attend” a school, I (as a parent) would rather decide which school, for both my sake and my children’s. And if I’m paying taxes, and other kids are getting tax moneys for their education, vouchers are more fair.

Wolf, writing in The Daily Signal, offers evidence that these eminently sensible policies lead to great results. “In Washington, D.C., use of an Opportunity Scholarship increased the likelihood of a student graduating by 71 percent.” Research into the effects of Milwaukee’s program show it “significantly increased the rates of high school graduation, college enrollment and persistence in college for the low-​income students.…”

Researchers at Brookings Institution and Harvard found similar results for New York City’s “privately funded K‑12 scholarship program.”

In his 1859 philosophical polemic, On Liberty, John Stuart Mill argued that parents have a duty to educate their children — and society an interest in seeing these duties met. But that doesn’t entail setting up government schools.

It’s time to catch up with Mill’s 1859 wisdom.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Vouchers Work