In a recently-released report ranking freedoms in the 50 states, Massachusetts was 46, with neighboring New Hampshire taking the number one spot.
"This project develops an index of economic and personal freedom in the American states. Specifically, it examines state and local government intervention across a wide range of public policies, from income taxation to gun control, from homeschooling regulation to drug policy." ~Authors William Ruger and Jason SorensIn a recently-released report ranking freedoms in the 50 states, Massachusetts was 46, with neighboring New Hampshire taking the number one spot.
The study was completed by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, a center which the Associated Press said tends to "lean libertarian."
The list of overall freedoms was compiled by authors William Ruger, a political science professor at Texas State University-San Marcos; and Jason Sorens, a political science professor at the University at Buffalo, State University of New York; based on three categories of measurements.
In the author's own words, the final determinations were made based on:
- Measures of social and personal freedoms such as peaceable citizens’ rights to educate their own children, to own and carry firearms, and to be free from unreasonable search and seizure;
- More than 150 distinct public policies;
- Careful measurements of fiscal policies in a way that reflects the true cost of government to the citizen.
Massachusetts ranked 43 in the nation for economic freedoms and 47 for personal freedoms.
New York is considered the most restrictive state to live in overall.
The Bay State's poor ranking on economic freedoms was attributed in part to former Governor Mitt Romney's individual health care mandate under which residents must maintain coverage or pay an annual penalty.
The authors said that the percentage of debt held by the state along with laws deemed "restrictive" also hurt the ranking.
"The biggest fiscal problem for Massachusetts is debt, which equals more than a
quarter of personal income," the authors wrote in the report. "Meanwhile, on personal freedoms the state has highly restrictive gun laws, bicycle and motorcycle helmet laws, personal injury and uninsured motorist auto-insurance mandates, fairly restrictive gambling laws, a total fireworks ban, extremely strict private and homeschool requirements, terrible asset-forfeiture rules, extremely strict campaign-finance laws, high cigarette taxes, and a total statewide smoking ban."
Factors that were regarded positively by the authors include the legalization of same-sex marriage, decriminalization of marijuana possession and the nature of the state's labor laws, excluding workers' compensation funding.
With extraordinarily low rankings across the board, the authors offered suggestions that they believe would increase the freedoms of its citizens and therefore the overall state ranking.
The authors offered that:
- Massachusetts is abnormally fiscally centralized. Reduce state grants to local school districts to encourage better use of funds. Use savings to retire state debt.
- Reform asset forfeiture to place burden of proof on the government and to redirect proceeds to the general fund.
- Repeal the antiquated requirement that new private schools obtain approval from local school boards.
What do you think about this report? Is it fair to characterize a state based on these factors? Join the conversation and chime in by commenting below.
You can view the full "Freedom in the 50 States" report below or download a PDF by clicking here
Freedom States 2011