David McElroy

In popular mythology, police officers and firefighters are the heroes of society. One of the staples of journalism is the brave cop or firefighter who risks his life for others. Is it still true?

These days, it seems as though departmental “policies and procedures” in some places are conspiring to make it clear that the public’s safety is purely secondary to the job.

On Memorial Day, a suicidal man walked into San Francisco Bay and stood neck-deep for about an hour while about 75 people watched. Police and firefighters were called, but they refused to help when they saw the situation. The man took himself under the water and died while these “public safety” employees watched.

Police later said they didn’t know whether the man might be dangerous. Firefighters blamed budget cuts for the department not having proper training to go into the water to rescue the man. When asked whether he would go into the water to save a drowning child, the fire chief responded this way:

“Well, if I was off duty, I would know what I would do, but I think you’re asking me my on-duty response, and I would have to stay within our policies and procedures, because that’s what’s required by our department to do.”

This story is recounted by Steven Greenhut in the summer edition of City Journal, who makes the case that public safety is being endangered by state employee unionism. He argues that these “first responders” are being turned into the equivalent of bureaucrats. Ultimately, the state cares about the state and those who serve it, not about you.

The problems we face in 2012 are serious. Our children are counting on us to make the right choice for everyone. Yes, my friends, it can only mean one thing. Vote iPhone in 2012.

Many people remember the “bad old days” when we all chose our own phones. It was an inefficient world of competing brands and models — which just confused everyone. In these more enlightened times, we understand that it’s more efficient and fair for everyone to buy the same model. Even though we’re not seeing the predicted cost efficiencies so far, we’re confident that it’s just a matter of time before costs come down. Obviously, prices would have gone even higher if the Phone Unification Act hadn’t passed. This has been a godsend for the consumer.

There are still some selfish people who claim they should be able to buy what they want, without caring what their neighbors and fellow countrymen want. Thankfully, those self-styled individualists are dying out, probably because they’re too selfish to get anyone else to put up with them. Most people now understand that standardizing on one model is the only fair way.

Keep Reading

I don’t have any opinion about whether your health insurance plan should cover the cost of birth control or whether it should let you get the stuff with no co-pays.

If that’s important to you, then you ought to choose a provider who offers it (assuming it’s popular enough for someone to offer it). If it’s not important to you or if you’re opposed to birth control, you should choose a provider that doesn’t offer it — since the lack of that cost to the provider will lower your premium.

Simple, right? It’s the market making choices about what people value and are willing to pay for.

But that’s not the way it is when the coercive state is involved. The latest example came today when the Obama administration announced that starting in just under 18 months, insurance companies will be required to cover birth control. Further, the companies won’t be allowed to charge a co-pay. Even if it’s unprofitable, companies will be paying for birth control for any customer who wants it.

Keep Reading