The Constrained and Unconstrained Vision of America

Over my years teaching students from all walks of life, including immigrants, I was always amazed at the fortitude of those immigrants to succeed. I noticed this same fortitude among students coming from all religions and cultures. They came from broken homes, abusive marriages, and poverty. I have also seen many students coming from mills and manufacturing plants that closed due to poor trade deals made by our government. We would also see second career seekers from industry, military, or government. These students represented the true diversity of our society that is not defined by race and gender. They were successful if they were given the opportunity, and they assimilated into the culture of healthcare regardless of race or gender. Their talents and experiences brought a diversity of thought, which helped them succeed.

In many cases, they had to complete additional course work prior to entry because they did not have certain courses in high school. Many students told me that they did not take advantage of those courses in high school because they did not think they could pass the courses but now recognized their mistake. They would ask: Do you think I can pass in order to enter the program? I would reply, of course, you can, then add a caveat. Are you willing to do what is necessary to succeed? I never had one student say no to that question. I did not expect a no either. Why ask it? Later, the student might come to me upset about failing a course that they needed. I would ask: Did you do everything necessary to be successful? Tell me about your approach to the course. In many cases, they admitted that they did not study as they should. Some would recommit and succeed while others would not. I felt great when they succeeded and sad when they did not. In some cases, I did think a change of program was necessary.

In other words, they had to meet a certain standard to enter in order to be successful. If they did not meet the standard, they were not given a pass. From a humanistic standpoint, many may see this a cruel, but the reality is it helped them move on to something that was more in tune with their abilities. We would help them access those resources. One thing you cannot do is change a student’s abilities just like you cannot change human nature. You can provide them with opportunities to succeed, which includes a structured set of standards. Once they entered the program, they had to agree to professional and ethical standards. If their behavior was contrary, they were counseled. If it continued, it could result in dismissal.

We had several students who failed to succeed because they could not adhere to the appropriate behavior. From a humanistic standpoint, many may see this a cruel as well, but it was necessary. If they could not conduct themselves in a manner that was appropriate, they were not suited for a career in healthcare. In other words, they failed to assimilate. As an educator, we had to ensure students could be successful by assessing their abilities. If not, we failed to adhere to the standards required of us. These standards were the guiding force that ensured students had the tools to enter the workforce. We could not change the student since we cannot change human nature.

Thomas Sowell, who is an American economist and social theorist who is currently a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, refers to this a constrained vision of man in his book, A Conflict of Visions. However, the conflict of visions assumes two “basic conceptions of the nature of man” which have contended with each other since the 18th century. He calls them the constrained and unconstrained visions, and he defines them in the following manner:

The constrained vision takes human nature as given, and sees social outcomes as a function of (1) the incentives presented to individuals and (2) the conditions under which they interact in response to those incentives. . . .In the unconstrained vision, human nature itself is a variable, and in fact the central variable to be changed.

To the latter view, many feel the government can dictate change by creating a program or policy to ensure success. It is unconstrained because actions can be justified even if it is counter to the constitution. In our case of the unsuccessful student, it might mean the government program to lower standards so underperforming students could be successful. It might require that they not fully assimilate into the culture of healthcare, yet they graduate.

This lack of assimilation could potentially result in unprofessional actions once in the field and harm to a patient. It could mean they do not pass their boards to get licensed. It would mean they were not served well in the beginning and failed to succeed. The answer to the unconstrained vision is to allow them to work since they graduated without a license or credential. In fact, there are some in Raleigh that see it this way. I can tell you unequivocally that 100% of all applicants for licensing regardless of background are granted a license if they meet the criteria and complete the process. It would not be possible if they did not assimilate into the culture of healthcare.

This fact does not mean we can eliminate 100% of the unprofessional behavior, either. One to two percent of all practitioners have some issues during their career. Less than 1% lose their license because of their unprofessional actions. Some would argue that there would not be a need for healthcare licensing based on these numbers as many do on Jones Street in Raleigh. It is the professional standards that keep the low numbers beginning with their education, which is a constrained vision of standards matter. What would happen with the unconstrained vision? I would be a free-flowing stream of issues that I would have to investigate because a standard was not taught or enforced. In other words, the lack of assimilation into the culture of healthcare would place patients in danger.

Imagine not having standards for criminals to rehabilitate and assimilate back into society. What happens If they fail to assimilate? They become dependent on the government for help rather than being self-sufficient, or they return to a life of crime. You only need to look at New York, LA, or Portland these days for the answers. I can tell you, from my perspective, 100% of licensing applicants with criminal backgrounds were licensed in the last 5 years. Why? They met their debt to society, assimilated back into society, and completed all the educational requirements to qualify. It was not because of the unconstrained vision of eliminating or lowering the standard but the constrained vision of having a certain bar to reach. They were successful in reaching that high bar.

Now, imagine the illegal immigration issues. Many politicians and pundits have an unconstrained vision of immigration laws. They declare immigrant assimilation as a racist standard. In Clinton’s words in 2016, it is a “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, and Islamophobic” view. Is it? How does a set of standards or laws applied to all immigrants become racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, and Islamophobic? It does in the eyes of the unconstrained vision. In this unconstrained vision, it is wrong to deny entry to anyone seeking it and wrong to require assimilation. If we do not have orderly standards enforced, we are setting them up for failure in our country. If they do not understand the culture, they isolate themselves in cultural enclaves. If they do not assimilate, they cannot fully enjoy the many opportunities available to them. If they fail, they become dependent on the government for help rather than being self-sufficient.

You only need to look at the preamble of the Constitution to understand why we need a constrained vision of these issues: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” While we may not be perfect, immigrants and Americans alike need to understand we seek to create a perfect union “to establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”

To that end, we must ensure assimilation for those entering our country to ensure this end regardless of immigration status. If not, we do them and ourselves an injustice. We cannot secure domestic tranquility with an unequal application of the law. The blessings of liberty and prosperity can only be obtained when people seek it and achieve in a society that does not rely on government handouts. Government programs serve to empower the government itself regardless of intention. The reason is that government is filled with human beings, who are flawed by their very nature. It is the reason we have checks and balances in the government. It is also the reason that the Founders wanted to restrict government in size and scope.

Our general welfare, as a country, is at risk when an unconstrained vision becomes the standard. Although, I have faith that most people see the need to remain steadfast in the face of a few voices wanting to “fundamentally change our society,” which is a common perspective of the unconstrained vision especially among the 2020 Candidates. Be wary of anyone promising that the government can solve all life’s ills. They cannot pass any law to give you something that will not result in taking something from someone else. However, they can get government out of the way by reducing unnecessary regulations to allow prosperity to happen, so we can all enjoy the blessings of liberty. Be wary of politicians in general, especially when they have an unconstrained vision to change an election by seeking impeachment. For this reason, I leave you this:

Listen my friends carefully, and you shall hear that impeachment is near.

On the sixteenth of January, in Twenty-Twenty,

They came far and wide to hear the impeachment cry,

Of unconstrained language of Nancy and her managers on that fated midnight ride:

As they gathered around the podium that night,

Impeach on count one!

Impeach on count two!

They would decry with a “somber joy”,

No obstruction, bribery, or quid pro quo was declared

From the Hill that night, no crime committed nor listed,

They quoted Longfellow’s, Midnight Ride of Paul Revere,

Justification for their acts and articles did follow,

Breathlessly they decried on that fateful night in 2020 with much delight,

As revolutionaries lite, the President will forever be impeached,

Cameras near and far, the rapid fire of photos snapped,

With pens and photos, they could not contain their somber mood,

Pundits and politicians alike quipped and sniped,

As their “somber joy” was no longer in quiet disguise,

They could no longer hide from public view,

Their unconstrained actions will be a precedent they set,

Fear not I say, it will give way to a price,

A price they shall pay,

From our own Declaration of Independence, I repeat and say:

Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends,

It is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it,

And to institute new Government,

Laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form,

As to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness,

It is their right, it is their duty,

To throw off such Government,

And to provide new Guards for their future security,

These words, we hold self-evident as we seek a more perfect Union.