Missed Opportunity on Eugenics | Eastern North Carolina Now

   Publisher's note: The article below appeared in John Hood's daily column in his publication, the Carolina Journal, which, because of Author / Publisher Hood, is inextricably linked to the John Locke Foundation.

    RALEIGH     As I observed yesterday, the new budget plan for 2012-13 contains many good provisions. I admit to being frustrated, however, at the unwillingness of conferees to include $10 million to compensate victims of North Carolina's forced-sterilization program.

    If you've been following the Carolina Journal coverage and the John Locke Foundation's research analysis of the issue, you know the arguments for compensation. There are few government actions more abhorrent than using the power of the state to sterilize citizens deemed "unfit to reproduce" by some government council or bureaucrat. When government violates the rights of individuals, justice requires that they be compensated for their loss. The longer we wait, the more victims will pass away without receiving their just compensation.

    The failure is a bipartisan
John Hood
one. Past Democratic governors and legislatures did nothing. The new Republican-led legislature seemed poised to address the issue. Democratic lawmakers created an unnecessary complication a couple of weeks ago by running a tax-hike amendment that include the eugenics compensation. Surely they knew the amendment would fail, and they should have known that Senate rules would preclude bringing eugenics compensation up again, even in the budget bill. But if enough Republicans and Democrats had signaled their willingness to vote to suspend the rule, compensation could still have been enacted. They didn't, so it wasn't.

    Would eugenics compensation have set a bad precedent and open the door to more costly and controversial ideas such as slavery reparations? Absolutely not. There are no former slaves still living. The compensation program for sterilization victims was carefully designed to apply only to living victims, not to descendants, in part to avoid any such precedent. (Some victims had children before becoming sterilized.)

    This is not the beginning of some wide-ranging effort to right every wrong that may have occurred over the past four centuries of American history. This is a discrete program to address wrongs that occurred within our lifetimes, to North Carolinians who are still alive.

    To those individuals who may have convinced themselves that sterilization really wasn't all that bad a policy - because, after all, the victims' children would have become a burden on taxpayers - I would say that you really need to think about the implications of your position. It is true that one argument against big government is that it makes everything the business of the state. If you expand government health insurance programs to include most or all of the population, for example, you will inevitably force taxpayers to finance the consequences of poor decisions about personal health.

    Is the proper response to enact government policies that dictate nutrition, exercise, and other personal decisions? If you think that, you are allied with the likes of Mayor Bloomberg and the enforcers of the nanny state. If such allies make you nervous, then check your premises. The right - by which I also mean Right - response to the problem is not to impose some public will on private individuals. It is to shrink government and ensure that people retain both the freedom to choose and the responsibility to live with their decisions.

    So back in the 1950s, 1960s, and early 1970s, the right response to the issue of escalating welfare rolls was not for the government to sterilize people. It was to reform welfare programs to discourage out-of-wedlock births, encourage work, and transfer the responsibility of caring for the chronically poor or infirm from the impersonal government to family members, churches, charities, and other mediating institutions.

    In my opinion, eugenics compensation should have been a high priority for the 2012-13 budget. Some legislators apparently didn't agree. Well, there's always next year - except perhaps for some elderly victims who won't be with us in 2013.

    Hood is president of the John Locke Foundation and author of Our Best Foot Forward: An Investment Plan for North Carolina's Economic Recovery.
Go Back


Leave a Guest Comment

Your Name or Alias
Your Email Address ( your email address will not be published)
Enter Your Comment ( no code or urls allowed, text only please )




Political Power-Grab? John Locke Foundation Guest Editorial, Editorials, Op-Ed & Politics The Education Establishment fights another losing cause


HbAD0

Latest Op-Ed & Politics

most voters think EU officials not doing a good job on illegal immigration
Be careful what you wish for, you may get it
Come from behind by GOP candidate is a blueprint to 2024
Biden spending and energy policies to blame
Tuberculosis carried by illegal invaders has already infected Texas cattle

HbAD1

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) said this week that the only campaign promise President Joe Biden has delivered on as president is the complete dismantling of the U.S. southern border.
Hamas is reeling after losing two of their most cherished leaders on the same day: military commander Saleh al-Arouri, and Harvard President Claudine Gay.
President Joe Biden’s brother told the Internal Revenue Service that Hunter Biden told him he was in business with a “protege of President Xi,” referring to the leader of China, according to notes by an IRS investigator that were divulged during a congressional interview of Jim Biden.
Gov. Roy Cooper seeks a temporary restraining order to block a law changing the composition of the State Board of Elections.
X owner Elon Musk mocked a news segment from ABC News this week that promoted President Joe Biden’s talking points about the Democrat-led Senate’s failed border bill, which critics and many experts have said would make the situation on the border worse.
That’s the question Marguerite Roza of Georgetown University’s Edunomics Lab sought to answer in a recent webinar on the topic.

HbAD2

The University of Florida has fired all of its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) employees and shut down its DEI office.

HbAD3

 
Back to Top