John Locke said: “The end of law is not to abolish or restrain
but to preserve and enlarge freedom.” According to a new
report compiled by two Political Science scholars and
published by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University —
“Freedom in the 50 States” — some states understand this better
than others.
The paper is the “first-ever comprehensive ranking of the
American states on their public policies affecting individual
freedoms in the social, economic and personal spheres.” The
scholars approached their research with the philosophy that a
person should have the right to do what he wants, so long as his
actions don’t infringe on someone else. Specifically, the study
covers fiscal policy; taxation and spending issues; regulatory
policy, such as tort system, health insurance mandates and the
like; and paternalism which covers alcohol regulation and gun
control to marriage and civil union laws.
The rankings of some states come as no surprise. States like
Idaho and Indiana rank high in economic and personal freedom.
Southern states like South Carolina and Georgia rank lower in
personal freedom than Midwestern states. Other states like
Maryland, Rhode Island, and New Jersey rank lower in all
categories. Not surprisingly, New York ranks as the “least free”
state in the nation.
While it seems obvious California would rank where it did in
terms of economic policies (44th) the study said it also
“aggressively interferes in the personal lives of its citizens,”
ranking 47th in overall freedom. (Perhaps Hollywood elites
should jump on that bandwagon and do some good with
their millions.) Alaska came in number one on personal freedom
but 47th in economic freedom. Michigan of all places, had
the least amount of regulatory policies in the country. Maine
ranks second best on personal freedom, but comes in second worst
on economic freedom. These states seem to contradict their
reputation.
The temptation is to assume states and their rankings complement
their political leanings: All blue states will rank low in
personal and economic freedoms and red states, the opposite. For
many states, this doesn’t appear to be the case and raises some
interesting questions about where politics — a free sport —
comes into play with the numbers game of economics.
Conservatives, for example, were at Colorado’s political helm for
many years and could take credit for its ranking as the second
most free in the country. Using this logic, it would make sense
that Colorado is freer than Maryland or New York, states overrun
with Democrat legislatures and governors. While it’s true
Colorado is more free than those two East Coast states, the study
seems to contradict that a political party dictates its
“free-ness.” Continuing towards the Midwest, the report says:
“Despite frequently electing politicians who do not seem very
interested in preserving freedom, Iowa’s policies are fairly
freedom friendly.” Massachusetts is home to John Kerry and Ted
Kennedy but ranks higher on economic freedom than personal
freedom. Missouri, a state rife with political scandals, ranks
higher on personal and economic freedoms than one would think.
Still, there are explanations for this perceived dichotomy. The
scholars did not take into account some tricky issues like
abortion, citing the obvious challenge for true libertarians to
decide who has the rights — the mother or the fetus. They also
believe some states have come to restrict freedom because they
have been “responding more to interest group pressures and
politicians’ self-interest than to citizens’ most strongly held
preferences.”
The scholars explain some of this with a graph that shows the
relationship between the percentage a state voted for John Kerry
in 2004 and its scores on economic, personal, and overall
freedom. “[T]he relationship between ideology and personal
freedom is flat, reflecting the propensity of liberal and
conservative states to protect certain freedoms but not others
[…] In short, moderate states are no less or more free than
conservative states, but liberal states do tend to be less free,
particularly on economic issues.” A liberal state might on
one hand be willing to legalize medical marijuana, which would
make it freer personally, but it would have a more restrictive
tax code, which would make it less free economically. A more
conservative state might ban medical marijuana but would tax
citizens less so they are more free economically and overall, but
less free personally.
If you’re looking to move and wondering which state might best
accommodate your lifestyle choices, this study could be a good
starting point. But beware, if you want to live in the freest of
the free, you’ll have company. The study concluded Americans “are
attracted to freedom for its own sake, not just for the economic
benefits.” However, if you’re stuck for a while and reading this
from your laptop on a beach in California, don’t despair: Not
only have you got the surf, you’ve still got more freedom than
your neighbors around the world. “Even New York provides a much
freer environment for the individual than the majority of
countries. There are no Burmas or Zimbabwes among the American
states.”
