Student Association EVP Kyle Boyer has proposed making it mandatory. (Did you even know that it was voluntary?) In
this post and its comments section, SA Senator and
Patriot compatriot Logan Dobson calls this a "good idea," which he "tepidly" supports.
Patriot Editor-in-Chief Pat Ford disagrees:
Another forfeiture of principle from Logan Dobson.
Turning a voluntary fee into a mandatory fee so we can be continually nickled and dimed. Thanks, Logan.
Sell out.
I have a few thoughts. First, the voluntary library fee (a flat rate of $50 each semester, automatically billed but declinable at the student's request) is
Cass Sunstein's wet-dream: the perfect example of libertarian paternalism. It allows you to make your own choices, but structures the
architecture of those choices in a way that encourages lazy people to pick consistently a particular socially or individually beneficial path. Move the Jell-O to the end of the buffet line. Hide the cigarettes behind the convenience store counter. Pull small amounts of money from paychecks and automatically funnel it into a retirement account. Basically, do everything you want to do to people, but give them the opportunity for a low-cost "opt out" or the option to go a little further out of their way to do something harmful to themselves.
The proposal to make our donation mandatory--that is, to make it no longer a donation, to take the "libertarian" out of "libertarian paternalism"--doesn't surprise me. It's an unfortunate example of paternalism creep: libertarian paternalists are unafraid to take off the kid-gloves if you don't consistently make the "right" decision, which exposes the shallowness of their commitment to choice. (This is no secret: Sunstein advocates the manipulation of choice architecture instead of straight paternalism because he believes that the former will be cheaper and have a very Obamesque "post-partisan" appeal.) The emphasis will always be on paternalism: they want you to behave in a way beneficial to society, themselves, or yourself. Did you think they cared deeply about your right to choose? Oops.
I sometimes prefer open paternalists. At least they're straightforward. In the interest of straightforwardness, then, I'll ask Our Fair University and Mr. Boyer some questions: How many students routinely opt-out of the gift? Is that number so high as to imperil the library's funding? If so--and if this funding is the only way to keep the library functioning--why was the library donation made
a donation in the first place? If there is a reason that you once supported our right to choice but you do no longer, we deserve to know what it is. And if you never did support it in the first place, we deserve also to know that.