This is a
post from my personal blog. I am trying to bring up these points when I hear the "PR" talking point brought up - any other suggestions?
----
The phrase "personal responsibility" is being thrown around frequently of late, particularly by those on the right. The term is intended to remind the individual that he or she is solely responsible for his choices and, on another level, the quality of his or her life. The top Google find regarding personal responsibility
describes the concept in detail. At a basic level this is clearly a good trait to promote, but often the phrase glosses over the question of whether the individual in question had access to the resources or opportunities necessary to make an appropriate choice, and despite that we may want it to be, this is not always the case.
What I want to know is this--why is the phrase often used by people who are Republicans, usually so staunchly in favor of the "American way" of capitalism that they also strongly support the creation of
corporations and
LLCs ("limited liability company") to limit personal responsibility for a company's actions? For clarification, my point is not to denounce capitalism, but to illustrate the balance needed between free enterprise and sensible regulation. Don't the CEO's decisions affect potentially thousands of people in profound ways? If so, why do we shield executives from the repercussions of the decisions they make? Should they not take
personal responsibility for their corporation's actions?
Litigation has been proposed in some state legislatures and the U.S. Congress that espouses this viewpoint; an example is a bill that was passed in the U.S. House but did not receive a vote in the Senate, which was called the
Personal Repsonsibility in Food Consumption Act. These laws, in the name of "tort reform," attempt to limit the degree to which the consumer can sue a corporation for the long term effects of its products. Admittedly the cases cited in its defense are extreme, however there is often an assumption that should be questioned--in this example, the taking of "personal responsibility" assumes that the company provides enough accurate information about its products, and that they are available to the consumer, for the consumer to make an educated choice. The details of specific cases could call into question whether that took place--whether the company executives took
personal responsibility to make sure their company was providing its customers the needed information. If that is the question, the lawsuit is not "frivolous" at all.
Recently, cuts to Medicaid in the federal budget that will raise co-payments to low income recipients were defended by Republican Rep. Joe Barton because they "
encourage personal responsibility." This, as the previous author points out, while the Congressional Budget Office "has concluded that such increases would lead many poor people to forego health care or not to enroll in Medicaid at all – contributing to some of the $4.8 billion in Medicaid savings envisioned over the next five years." These spending cuts, among many others, occur while Republicans continue to argue that their tax cuts, primarily benefitting those with high income, should be made permanent. When do we get to see Congress taking personal responsibility for these choices?[br />
Freedom and liberty and personal responsibility are all hallmarks of America, but unless the duty to take personal responsibility is applied equally, and unless responsibility is truly paired with opportunity, it's simply not all it's cracked up to be.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(35 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
