Categories
general freedom moral hazard nannyism responsibility too much government

The $659,000 Non-Question

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
Common Sense

Big Brother vs. Burger and Fries

Restaurants in some towns are now being forced to stop using trans fats. According to the latest biochemistry, trans fats are bad for you.

No doubt. Many foodstuffs are bad for you, can even kill you, at least in the long run. Maybe — if you eat too much of them, exercise too little, and don’t get flattened by a Mack truck before your vessels clog.

But what business is it of anyone in government what risks I take to enjoy my candy bar? And if it’s kosher to ban restaurants from using trans fats, what’s next, outlawing sugar, grease, and fast food?

Outlawing fast food? McDonald’s will always be with us.

Except in South Los Angeles, where a town council has just passed a year-long moratorium on new fast-food restaurants.

And so yesterday’s argument from absurdity becomes today’s compromise and tomorrow’s legislation. South LA is not facing an outright ban on fast food. But what the  nutritional tyrants are doing there comes close. And nudges us closer to the outright prohibition they would prefer. They just don’t want individuals to make their own choices about what food to eat or restaurants to patronize.

What’s next, a moratorium on . . . well, let’s not give these guys any more ideas, even absurd ones. What we can conceive as idiotic they can spiff up as policy. And somehow not laugh.

But then, I’m not laughing now, either.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.