"To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing,
if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained?"
-- Chief Justice John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison, 1803

Friday, February 29, 2008

And the Creeping Sovietism continues with Hillary’s plan to reduce poverty:

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is offering a plan to improve childhood nutrition and setting a goal to reduce by half the 12 million youngsters living in poverty over the next dozen years.

A package of proposals, to be unveiled Thursday, includes a “comprehensive” early education initiative that starts with nurse’s visits for pregnant women, lets children begin the Head Start program earlier and calls for universal pre-kindergarten programs.

The New York senator and Democratic presidential candidate also says she would deal with childhood hunger by putting in place a food safety net, and give children “greater access to healthy, fresh food.”

She was to spell out her proposals in a speech at the child care development center on Ohio University’s southern campus.

Clinton aides said the new programs would carry and annual price tag of $5 billion to $6 billion. A significant portion of her plan comes by expanding existing programs. She would cover the cost by toughening enforcement to collect taxes currently owed but not paid.

Clinton said she would direct her agriculture secretary to develop a plan to end childhood hunger. The nutrition effort would come largely through signing up more people for the food stamp program and expanding its benefits.

Clinton also says she would launch an effort to get junk food out of schools. She would require schools that get federal funding through the school lunch or breakfast programs to offer only food that meets or surpasses USDA standards.

Background documents outlining her proposal were provided to The Associated Press and include some proposals that Clinton has offered in the past such as calling for an increase in the minimum wage to aid the working poor, as well as expanding the earned income tax credit, a move that helps the same group.

In addition, Clinton was calling for stronger programs aimed at cutting teen pregnancy as well as toughening child support enforcement programs to “support responsible fatherhood.”

Where do I start?

First off, we’ve all tried all this stuff and it’s done nothing.  We’ve poured trillions of dollars into these programs to no avail.

Second, notice Hillary’s logic—children are poor only because their government isn’t doing enough. Never mind that most poor children are in poverty not because of a lack of government attention but because their parents dropped out of school, did drugs, committed crimes or had their children at young ages.  Her last initiative—to cut teen pregnancy—might have some long term benefit. That is, if you trust the government to reduce teen pregnancy, which I don’t.

Third, and most important, Hillary is certainly aware of both the above points. Hillary is many things but she is not stupid. No, child poverty is an excuse for her to advance her vision of the Ultimate Nanny State. The government starts taking care of you in the womb (that is, unless your mother decides to abort you). You are hustled in government indoctrination centers schools and daycare centers at the earliest possible moment. You are bombarded from cradle to grave with government messages about appropriate behavior. And if you still screw up, no worries! The Nanny State is there to bail you out of any personal responsibility.

Why do I call it Creeping Sovietism? Because the Soviet Union had a very similar system. Children were in government daycare by the time they were three months old. From then on, they were continually indoctrinated as to proper behavior by their government. They were never anyone’s children, really. They were assets of the State. If someone can explain the difference between the Soviet system and Hillary’s Village, I’d like to hear it.

There is something worse than having poor children raised by irresponsible parents. Having them raised by government.