Conservative states the most free

Wednesday, May 6, 2009

Bryan Fischer, Executive Director

CONSERVATIVE STATES OFFER THE MOST FREEDOM

According to a new study released by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, Idaho is the fourth best state in the country in offering personal and economic freedom to its residents.

So if you think it’s bad here, imagine what it would be like to be stuck in Rhode Island, New Jersey, or New York, which bring up the rear.

Significantly, there is a strong correlation between conservatism and freedom on the one hand and liberalism and bondage on the other. The states that are most free tend to be the most conservative politically: S. Dakota, Colorado, Texas, Missouri, Tennessee, Arizona, Virginia and N. Dakota join Idaho in

the top ten, while the least free states are without exception bastions of statism run wild: Connecticut, Massachusetts, Washington, Hawaii and California all have the dubious honor of being in the bottom ten.

This gives the lie to the myth that conservatives are the repressive ones. The truth, as is often the case, turns out to be the exact opposite. The more liberal a state is, the less likely it is to offer its residents genuine personal and financial freedom.

The basic instinct of the conservative is to be left alone, while the basic instinct of the liberal is to meddle. Conservatives have a high regard for individual autonomy, choice and personal responsibility, while statists, thinking they are smarter than everybody in the room, want to dictate lifestyle choices to as many of the benighted and unwashed masses as possible.

Freedom as defined by the Center is “the ability to dispose of one’s own life, liberty and justly acquired property however one sees fit, so long as one does not coercively infringe on another individual’s ability to do the same.”

New York, the least free state in the union, has the highest taxes in the country, high spending on social services, extremely high government debt, restrictive gun laws, and burdensome home school regulations.

Idaho, in contrast, has the lowest government debt ratio in the U.S., below average taxes and spending – although Mercatus says “Idaho could ... improve its record here,” which gets no argument from me –, comparatively relaxed gun control laws, and no regulations on private or home schooling. The Center does point out that, in Idaho, “Individual income taxes are actually rather high,” so there is clearly room to make things better.

But this study reminds us we have many reasons to be grateful to live in Idaho, and plenty of incentive to work to keep it that way. Our mission at the IVA is to keep working to make Idaho the friendliest place in the world to raise a family, and we’d like to see Idaho in time occupy the top spot on the freedom poll.

Mercatus Center at George Mason University - Freedom in the 50 States: An Index of Personal and Economic Freedom

MAINE’S GOVERNOR DOES 180 IN GAY MARRIAGE; DC VOTE DICEY FOR CONGRESS

Maine’s governor wilted under pressure from the left today, reversed his long-held position, and signed

gay marriage into law in Maine, leaving Rhode Island as the only New England state yet to capitulate to the relentless pressure of homosexual activists.

The D.C. city council voted last night to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states, which could be illuminating for one reason: this policy change cannot go into effect with the consent of Congress and the president.

This is an opportunity to get every member of Congress and the president – who has taken the same position on gay marriage as Miss California, Carrie Prejean – on record on this critical social issue. However, if Congress does nothing, it goes into effect in 30 days, and there has been deafening silence from Democrats and the White House on this one.

President Obama appears ready to vote “Present” again.

Newsmax.com - DC Gay Marriage Vote Could Entangle Congress

MORE PROOF THAT LICENSING DAYCARES NO ASSURANCE OF SAFETY

Licensing daycares is sold to a gullible public on the grounds that we must bring them under the thumb of government to assure the safety of children.

How to explain then, that Ada County’s first swine flu case apparently was contracted by an infant in a

licensed daycare facility? How did licensing protect this child, or the other infants who may have been exposed to the virus through this child?

In fact, the larger a daycare is, the riskier it is for the health of individual children, as children are exposed to germs from every infected child in the confined quarters of most facilities.

In New York, authorities found an entire arsenal of weapons and ammunition in the basement of a licensed daycare center. How did licensing keep that from happening? It didn’t. The cache was discovered in connection with a gang bust, not by welfare workers.

All licensing does is ratchet up the cost of child care for strapped Idaho families and offer them a false sense of safety. Nothing can replace the eyes of parents in evaluating the safest places for their children to be cared for. Parents are in daycare facilities five days a week, while bureaucrats from the state come by once a year.

Ada County baby girl likely has H1N1 swine flu | Idaho Statesman

FOXNews.com - New York Day Care Center Accused of Storing Arsenal of Gang Weapons

OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES CAN SHOW OBAMA THE WAY

Thomas Sowell points out today that one of the great jurists of the 20^th century, Oliver Wendell Holmes, wouldn’t have gotten a second look from President Obama in his search for a new Supreme Court justice because he just didn’t have enough “empathy.”

Holmes saw that his role as a judge was simple: “My job is to apply the law.” Not to interpret it, remake it,

invent it, but to apply it, whether he himself happened to think the law was a good one or not.

In fact, Holmes once said, “I loathed most of the things in favor of which I decided.”

He correctly saw the role of a judge as like that of an umpire. He said at one point that his job was “to see that the game is played according to the rules whether I like them or not.” If a “rule” was a bad rule, it was up to Congress to change it, not the Supreme Court.

He did not “think it desirable that the judges should undertake to renovate the law” – that was a task for the democratic process.

There may be certain rules umpires dislike – maybe they think it is fundamentally discriminatory that pitchers get four mistakes and batters only three. Certainly “empathy” demands that this unconscionable social injustice must be corrected by the enlightened men in blue!

But they understand that their task is to apply the rules of baseball, not reform them. And so qualified justices understand their role is to apply the law, not remake it.

Unfortunately, we are almost certain to get from Obama a justice who should not be allowed within miles of any courthouse anywhere, someone for whom the constitution is a bendable, foldable thing which can be ignored if necessary if it gets in the way of “empathy.”

Thomas Sowell : "Empathy" Versus Law: Part II - Townhall.com