The concept of America as an ownership society is not new. What's new is the notion that the federal government would take serious steps to encourage it in areas other than home ownership. But that's what Bush is promoting for his second term. It's a message I got to hear first hand when I listened to him speak in Stratham, New Hampshire this past August. He said from the stump: This is an exciting time to be an America, in many ways. It's a changing world, and government has got to understand that. You know, you've got workers, when most of our dads were coming up, they worked for the same company, didn't change jobs and so the pension plans or the health care plans were adjusted for that. Now it's a different world. People are changing jobs, people are working out of their homes. Oftentimes, moms and dads are both working. And policy has got to reflect these changing times. Which means, it seems like to me the best way to do so is to encourage an ownership society. For example, we want people owning and managing their own health care accounts that they can take with them, job to job, or go from job to home.
In an column that appears in today's New York Post, George Will talks about the ownership society and says a Bush re-election could have a profoundly positive impact on America. The center of Bush's second-term agenda is his "ownership society" tapestry of tax incentives for individuals to exercise increased responsibility for their personal security and opportunity. The contrasting conservative and liberal emphases on freedom and equality are clear: Tax-favored accounts for retirement, medical and education choices promote the attitudes and aptitudes of autonomous individuals exercising the freedom to choose. Liberalism's unchanging agenda involves increased dependency on government in the name of equality.
Could we have a starker contrast between candidates. It's really hard for me to imagine why anybody would think it's good idea to vote for Kerry, even if you could believe what he says.
Comments