THE CHOICE BOX            

  The report from the Michigan League of Human Services was devastating. From the DETROIT NEWS: “Michigan's declining investment in higher education is among the worst in the nation. “

                Wow! That’s awful! The Michigan League of Human Services, a professional advocacy group for higher government spending on social welfare programs, gives us a stark choice: increase more state tax-paid funding to Higher Ed, or see our people become more ignorant and our economy rot in the permanent depression. Spend more or die! The choice is clear.

                Or is it? First off, you’d think by now claims by advocacy groups would be looked at like Ford dealers releasing a report that Chevys kill babies. Second, there’s evidence that Higher Ed has become a bubble, like Beanie Babies, Tech stocks, and housing values. Glenn Reynolds of INSTAPUNDIT has written extensively on the subject.   Higher Ed, private and public, costs have risen faster than the rate of inflation, fuelled by state spending and increasingly, easy credit student loans. It can’t go on forever and it won’t. But “the choices are stark,” right? Right? Well, are there any other choices?

Are the Only Choices Strawberry and Doggie....?

I always get suspicious when folks present a menu of alternatives. It’s funny how the choices always seem a bit skewed. It’s bad enough when the choice is Chocolate or Strawberry. Gee, why can’t I have Vanilla? Or Mack Island Fudge, Orange Sherbet or Neapolitan?  It’s even worse when the choices are Strawberry and Strawberry Lite. It gets downright suspicious when your alternatives are Strawberry or Doggie Vomit. Then you need to start asking questions, starting with: who framed the choices?

In every possible decision, there’s a wide world of choices. Not every choice is reasonable, desirable, or even sane, so it gets excluded from consideration. What’s left is a range of possible alternatives, which I’ll call the Choice Box. Inside the Choice Box are the things we can do, outside are the things we won’t even consider. Face it, not every choice belongs in the Box. Adopting Nazism or legalizing human sacrifice are a couple of choices that don’t belong in the Choice Box. 

Suggesting More Choices is...Discouraged...

But this natural and rational winnowing of alternatives is easily open to abuse. When one team want to manipulate a decision making process, the first thing they do is narrow the Choice Box. They eliminate as many alternatives to their own agenda as possible, and reduce the remainder to crude caricatures. Instead of 150 flavors, it’s Strawberry or Doggie Vomit.  Anyone who tries to suggest another flavor is…well…discouraged.

How are people discouraged? First off, the Manipulators rig the process that selects what goes in the Choice Box.  They also wage PR campaigns to discredit other possible choices. They smear the choices and choice supporters with abuse, often personal—how often do you hear tax cut advocates called “mean-spirited” and folks demanding accountability from K-12 public schools called “anti-education,” teacher-bashers,”  and even “kid-haters?” Of course, there’s always reliable old “racist.”

Don't Narrow It--EXPAND the Choice Box!

The whole point of these tactics is to narrow the Choice Box and force one agenda. If your public policy alternatives are Socialism, Socialism Lite, and Stalinism, the direction of your society is clear. The identity and motives of those who manipulated the Choice Box is even clearer. For decades our old media self-consciously defined themselves as “Gatekeepers” of public opinion. They were the trusty guardians of the Choice Box. Today they are largely revealed and discredited as partisan players, but it might be useful to go back and see what choices never made it past the Gate on their watch.

We want to expand the Choice Box. Give people more and more choices. In Higher Ed, why limit the Choice Box to a) “spend more tax funds” or b) “die.” Are the only real choices Strawberry or Doggie Vomit? Who framed this box anyhow? Why can’t we enlarge the Choice Box to include rolling back employee compensation, or  radically changing the delivery system for Higher Ed, or elimination of university autonomy—if we’re paying the bills, we get a say in the spending? Widen the Choice Box!

We’re facing lots of choices in Michigan, especially as the spectacularly failed Granholm Administration slinks away. Higher Ed is just one area that needs work. But before we make any decisions, our first reform has to be freeing the Choice Box from decision riggers.  When you get a menu, ask what’s NOT on it, and why? Demand more choices be included. Widen the Choice Box, and reject those who narrow it. Otherwise you’ll always end up with Doggie Vomit, and even dogs get sick of that.