Will writes from Washington, D.C. (well, Arlington, Virginia). You can reach him at willblogcorrespondence at gmail dot com.

Related Post Roulette

3 Responses

  1. Scott says:

    Another Democrat bringing the nanny state to fruition. Why not allow for the sale of organs? God forbid we turn to the capitalism for answers.Report

  2. Michael Drew says:

    It seems the clear upshot of this post, then, is that the architecture is adaptable to public preferences (opt-out/opt-in as compared to “mandated choice,” which is obviously a complete misleading name for a policy in which officials are merely “mandated” to ask you your preference, with neither opt-in nor opt-out being the default). This hardly seems like a condemnation.Report

  3. trizzlor says:

    I’m curious what the spectrum is here as government gets more involved in what it think the choice should be: for example, by providing a little blurb after the organ donation question that says how many children were saved by organ donors alongside a picture of a smiling child; or, more drastically, by waving the license processing fee, etc.Report