Categories
National

Health Care Suggestions


Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

Michael Cannon, a self-described conservative turned libertarian at the Cato Institute has some very good ideas on what health care reform should look like. (Hat tip Scott) Some of his suggestions seem like they would appeal to most reasonable people (“think freedom, not universal coverage” and “health-savings accounts are not enough”) while others look like they are ripe targets for those who have been working to “reform” our health care system for 15 years already (most notably “don’t ‘improve’ welfare programs — cut them”). It is important to dig deeper into such suggestions before dismissing such libertarian ideas as heartless. In this case, digging deeper means nothing more than reading the rest of the paragraph:

At the behest of conservatives, Jeb Bush and other governors have made Medicaid more consumer-friendly. The only problem is that Medicaid and SCHIP are welfare programs, and making welfare more attractive leads to…more welfare.

After all what is more heartless, finding ways to help people become more self-sufficient, or teaching them to be dependent on the contributions of people they don’t even know? (The second one sounds like a very precarious position to be in.)

Mr. Cannon also throws in gems like “The lefties aren’t always wrong.” Only a libertarian would say that to a conservative – and the conservatives need to hear it. My personal favorite though (because it’s too easy to forget sometimes) is this – “private markets are not necessarily free markets.” That’s the thing that has worried me about so many of the plans proposed by many leading conservatives. They pat themselves on the back for turning to private markets but they do nothing to ensure that the market is actually free. That difference is why “the health-care industry does not want free markets.” They are all for private markets where they can make their private fortunes, but those who are thriving in a market that is not free have little incentive to make the market free.

Some people will argue that the rising cost of health care is driven by the rising costs of running health care related businesses, but rising costs are easy to accept when you know that nothing short of releasing a drug that leads to fatal consequences is going to put you out of business. Health care is probably more stable than real-estate – and almost as stable as alcohol, tobacco, and pornography.

I’ve strayed from my original point – go read the article by Michael Cannon.

Categories
culture

Doing the Impossible


Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

I thought it interesting to learn about the blog post from Bobby Calvan – the blog no longer exists – which proves that nothing is impossible. (Hat tip Steve Urquhart) For those who are interested the entire post – and the 197 comments that were generated in just over 3 hours – has been preserved by Doc Weasle.

A brief summary would go like this – Bobby, a reporter, is in a hurry in Baghdad and is delayed by an American soldier because of insufficient identification at a checkpoint. He feels superior to the soldier because this particular soldier has not heard of Knight Ridder (and pronounces the name wrong to boot). He then takes to time to blog about the incident as evidence that the American soldiers, “are the absolute worst.”

In feeling so intellectually superior to this soldier he demonstrates that one bit of trivia is not proof of a great body of knowledge. Apparently he is unaware that Knight Ridder is not a household name (like the Associated Press, or ever Reuters might be) because they don’t publish anything with their name. In other words, they are exactly one step further up the money chain than most readers ever dig into their news sources.

The post proves that even in Baghdad Bobby Calvan felt safe enough to cop an attitude with a soldier and that it doesn’t take long to have almost 200 people tell him off for it.

I’m not sure which is harder – uniting the internet (like Bobby Calvan did) or enforcing democracy as an outsider (like the soldier in Baghdad is trying to do). Hopefully the soldiers will eventually be as successful as Mr. Calvan has been.

Categories
State

Put Ethics Before Politics


Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

As a voucher supporter I have to agree with Jesse:

As a voucher supporter, I have gone from embarrassed with to disgusted by PCE. This event, going from unethical and sleazy to potentially illegal, is absolutely inexcusable and I would encourage every Utahn to immediately stop donating to them and every candidate to refuse their filthy money and return whatever campaign contributions they’ve been given. Utah businesses should refuse to do business with them and Utahns should refuse to work for them. Astroturfing, phishing, push polling… these are not acceptable. PERIOD.

If you truly support vouchers like I do, you will run as far away from PCE as possible and give them the stern and harsh punishment they now deserve. Starve them for dollars and make them wither and die in this state. They have done more to damage the concept of vouchers than any anti-voucher group could ever dream of. Their loud and visible bad example makes everyone else look bad by association. Thanks to PCE, anyone who supports vouchers, no matter how honest, sincere and open they are, will be tainted with the labels of dishonesty, trickery and ulterior motives.

Besides starving PCE of cash, voucher supporters should refrain from any further reference to PCE – they don’t deserve any further publicity for any of their arguments. Perhaps if the reaction against this is strong enough people will recognize that PCE is not representative of the entire voucher support base. As Jesse said, some of us are honest and sincere and staunchly opposed to gutter politics.

Categories
culture

Four Good Criteria


Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

I’m always looking to quantify what makes a candidate acceptable or not. Thus I was drawn to four criteria that Scott suggested we should seek in candidates we would support. They should be Honest, Good, Wise, and Constitutional. Scott does a good job of expanding on each of the criteria, but this qualifier should guide all our political decisions:

All of the criteria we are called upon to apply to candidates is highly subjective and/or runs on a sliding scale. It requires a fair amount of personal effort to find out about each candidate and determine how well each measures up to the criteria. We should avoid a knee-jerk reaction to any candidate.

As I have been thinking about these criteria the idea came to me that we might be well served to apply the same criteria to the laws we sometimes vote on. Doubtless there is plenty of disagreement on whether vouchers are honest, good, wise, or constitutional. Different people will come down to different conclusions on each criteria, but it might elevate the debate if we would focus on those fundamental qualities rather than stooping to political maneuvering and scare tactics.

As citizens we do not directly vote on most of the laws that are made, but if we are able to choose representatives with these four characteristics, and then those public servants were to evaluate the laws they are called to vote on by applying those criteria we would be more likely to get laws that are in the best interests of the people and not merely the best interests of a special interest group, or a lobbyist, or the candidates hopes for reelection.

Categories
State

Voucher Related Tidbits


Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

The closer we get to November the more likely we are to see commentary related to vouchers. Wouldn’t it be nice if all of it was as well thought out as Conner Boyack’s Weighing in on the Utah Voucher Program – but I won’t hold my breath. Connor seems to be trying in a single post to sum up the entire voucher debate – which is an impressive task. Perhaps one reason that I like Connor’s thoughts is that his conclusion is quite similar to mine – the voucher bills might be flawed (as most bills are) but I believe they will prove to be a positive move for education in Utah.

Though I support vouchers I can’t say that I support all the political maneuvering of voucher supporters (not that I favor political maneuvering of voucher opponents). I find it disturbing to hear reports of potential political retaliation (in reference to this article). Vouchers should stand or fall on their merits – there should be no stooping to coercive tactics to bolster political support.

Categories
culture

Fostering Engagement


Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

I have been contemplating the implications found in Scott Hinrichs’ Civically Disengaged ever since he posted it. I have been concerned about the lack of civic involvement by most people for a long time because I am convinced that it is a cause for many of our social problems – especially our increasingly divisive political environment which only makes all our problems seem larger and discourages individual participation at all levels of government.

Scott has identified some causes of our disengagement:

Why has this happened? Part of it has to do with the mass movement of women into the workforce. Americans have become uncomfortable with single-sex organizations. Although women still do most of the work at home, men have accepted many more domestic duties than their fathers did. Thus, they have less free time to devote to pursuits outside of the home and family.

The whole of our society has become less formal as people have sought out more flexibility. People are less comfortable with conformity. People of the boomer generation and younger aren’t into special handshakes, funny hats, and mandatory meetings.

Another factor is mobility. People are far more mobile than ever before. It takes time to sink roots in any new location. Increasing diversity, as Putnam’s recently released study shows, decreases interpersonal and communal trust, even among people that are most alike, resulting in people drawing inward and away from social connections. The tendency increases with population density.

Putnam says, however, that the biggest factor in civic disengagement is TV. He said that back in 1996 before many people were connected on the Internet. Going online can be far more interactive than TV. It can even lead to civic discussion and coordination. But certainly not in the same way or at the same level as involvement in traditional civic organizations.

Finding out where we are and how we got here is nice, but the operative question is always – where do we go from here? I’d love to have some solid answers but lacking that I’ll share my own ideas. The causes illustrated above are:

    • We have become uncomfortable with single-sex organizations
    • Men have less free time to devote to pursuits outside of the home and family
    • People are far more mobile than ever before
    • Television discourages interaction

I am convinced that the discomfort with single-sex organizations could be easily overcome by building new coed organizations to replace the old single-gender groups.

The issue of having less free time is partially a matter of priorities. If people viewed civic groups as being more relevant and important than other things that compete for their time they would chose to be engaged. This may be a marketing problem as civic organizations attempt to show people how they can make a positive impact in the community. It might also be an issue of the organizations themselves adapting to a new cultural setting. It may be that we need to build organizations that are better suited to our current society or such civic organizations might already exist and we just need to give them time to gain the influence that has existed in older civic organizations.

I think the issue of mobility is the most crucial and subtle deterrent to civic engagement. It does take time to sink our roots somewhere and we do ourselves a disservice if we wait to sink those roots. Imagine how much more engaged someone would be civically if they settle down at 25 knowing that they are going to stay put for 50 years. By 35 they can be very well established in the community and contributing. Not only that but they care much more about a place if they expect to stay there for half a century. By contrast, imagine someone who moves every 3 to 5 years from one job to another until they are 40 years old where they then stay until they go into a kind of active retirement by the age of 55. By the time this person has set down any roots they can only expect to participate civically for a very few years – if it’s even worth the effort.

As for television – by itself it is a deterrent to civic engagement, but it can be used by groups to invite engagement. While the internet might some involvement that is inferior to the engagement in real civic organizations it can also be used as a strong tool to increase involvement and communication for an organization in a way that can compensate for some of the other factors in our society that discourage engagement. For example, I can still participate with civic organizations when my company sends me to live overseas for 6 months or a year.

Scott lists many groups that have been shrinking (scouts, bowling leagues, labor unions) does anyone know of civic organizations that are growing? Does anyone else have suggestions of how to help people participate in their communities civically?

Categories
State

Vouchers vs Credits For School Choice


Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

I enjoyed reading Scott’s thoughts on Funding School Choice. (The series that lead to his post can be found at the National Review Online – parts 1, 2, 3, 4) I am wondering if we have much to gain right now by discussing a new funding option for school choice. I would like to have seen this discussed earlier, or it might be good to open discussions again after the November vote.

The idea of tax credits to fund parental choice in education seems to have some positive attributes – like not having the money go to the government and then get redistributed. On the other hand, as Scott notes, this does not help those who pay little in taxes which is where vouchers have more merit. I would love to hear some perspective from other people (especially from some voucher opponents) on the relative merits of tax credits for education.

Categories
life National

Libertarianism


Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

Early in my political study I flirted with the ideas of libertarianism. I was highly disenchanted with the Republicans and skeptical of the chances that the Democrats could right their party which, at the time, lacked a specific direction. I had taken the worlds smallest political quiz and though my score varied at times I was consistently conservative on the economic scale so I was not a “Statist” (big government) but I had enough movement to score as a Republican, a Libertarian, or a Centrist. I have since concluded that part of the reason I scored as a Libertarian at times is that the quiz is made by Libertarians and the questions are worded so that if you are borderline you are likely to score as a Libertarian.

So why do I bring up this old information? Because I was surprised to learn about some other people who have traveled a similar path of considering Libertarianism. The difference is that Scott is much more articulate in stating Why I Am Not a Pure Libertarian. I think the explanation is beneficial for Libertarians or anyone who is exploring their own political leanings. (This also explains why I agree with Scott such a high percentage of the time.)

Categories
General

Our Crisis in Foreign Policy


Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

Frank does a good job discussing One Lesson From Two September 11th Events. He is completely right to ask:

What will it take for America to learn a similar lesson–that if we expect to be respected and not feared, that we must give respect? Why does America think it is better than the rest of the world, and that we don’t have to abide by the same rules and morals when dealing with the rest of the world? If we learned and practiced this one simple lesson, we would once again have the respect of nearly everyone. As it stands, they would spit on us if they didn’t think we’d drop a smart bomb on them for it.

Our crisis seems to be that the loudest voices in foreign policy seem to be those on the right who think that war is good for our popularity here at home (they’ve been proven wrong since we went to Iraq) and those on the left who think that spreading our money around the globe will make us popular internationally (they were proven wrong on September 11th, 2001). The fact is that both courses to action lead us to be resented. If our foreign policy was not bad enough, our domestic policy does the same thing as we insist from both camps that we must have the highest standard of living in the world. The fact is that we need to work hard and respect others and just take the standard of living that results from our hard work.

Categories
culture

Half of the Story


Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

In explaining why Utah politics has become totally dominated by the Republicans the Deseret Spectacle only covered one half of the story. He covers the back room machinery of the Religious Right. It would be foolish to argue that this didn’t happen, or even that it was unrelated to our current unfortunate predicament. There is another side to this tale that should be told. Ignoring this half of the story could prevent Democrats from regaining their seat at the political table in Utah.

While the maneuvering on the right has been going on since “roughly 20, 25 years ago,” there was another contributing factor which began even earlier. Fully 75 years ago we had a president, who was a Democrat and who is still highly revered for pulling us through the Great Depression. During his tenure he established many government programs which grew our government to a size and scope that had previously been unimaginable in this country. Ezra Taft Benson published The Proper Role of Government in 1968 advocating smaller government. The positions he espoused are generally highly regarded in Utah, especially after 30 years ago when our economy was doing poorly as a result of our expanded government (after the economic growth of war had run its course). This made the social environment ripe for influence by conservative movements – that’s where the explanation of the Deseret Spectacle picks up the story.

If Democrats are to hope to regain a viable voice in Utah politics they must recognize that the image of moral relativism that has been plastered on them by the Jerry Falwell’s is the most obvious deterrent to becoming relevant in Utah, but possibly not the most damaging. They must find ways to tackle issues such as preserving the environment, improving education, and economic equality among our citizens without always turning to expanded government programs.

So long as Utah Democrats remain blind on this issue they will never talk themselves back into relevancy here. In fact, while they are busy shouting that their goals are not actually immoral, the Republicans are able to maintain power even while they are fiscally so liberal that they are alienating many who can see through the cheap label that the Democrats are fighting to remove. Unfortunately for those few, the Democrats do not appear to offer a more fiscally responsible alternative.