Because "Responsibility" Is Too Long of a Word

In a story in the Kansas City Star, a poli sci professor explains:

Mark Rushefsky, a political scientist at Southwest Missouri State University in Springfield, said the new policies represent a move away from the idea of shared action to deal with common concerns, whether for the poor and disabled or for consumers generally. They are steps toward what President Bush calls "the ownership society."

"The ownership society means you're on your own," Rushefsky said. "It is moving away from the idea of collective responsibility for health care or income maintenance. You see this in the private sector with the decline in private pensions."

The result, he said, is an increase in the average person's risk as both public and private programs are unraveled.

"The future will be more uncertain as people rely more on their own resources," Rushefsky said. "On Medicaid, Blunt is out there in front. But his overall policy reflects a reduction of the safety-net philosophy.

The political scientist was unable to comment on the efficiency or economic benefits of moving "responsibility" out of the hands of bureacrats whose primary interest is in amassing power, budget, and job security for themselves and whose secondary interest is the public whom they serve to the hands of individuals who have a stake in individual outcomes (not just the aggregate upticks in statistics which prove need for more power, budget, and job security for bureaucrats).