Video: The Nanny of the Month is …

posted at 6:32 pm on May 1, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Well, it might be too soon for the Secret Service chaperones to qualify for Reason TV’s monthly award, but I’d bet they’ll at least get nominated … if they ever actually get deployed.  In the meantime, enjoy the trio of nominees for April, as Reason TV selects the Nanny of the Month:

We’ve got Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal demanding clean urine in exchange for welfare benefits (a bad idea that also doesn’t work as advertised, but hey, at least the boozers are safe!), North Carolina regulators busting a blogger for praising the paleo diet (an offense that can get you tossed in the clink!), but this month the freakiest controllers come to us from a Brazilian city where public schools have begun tracking thousands of 4-to-14-year-olds with GPS-embedded uniforms. (At least they’re not tagging the kiddos’ ears!)

I’m not sold on the nomination for Deal, at least not while drugs remain illegal (which Reason opposes).  The intent is to make sure that taxpayer dollars don’t go to buy illegal drugs.  Taxpayers have a legitimate interest in how their funds get used, and those who don’t wish to submit don’t have to take the government dole.  The other two nominations are solid, though I might have chosen North Carolina over Brazil’s tracking mandate, but that’s a quibble rather than a criticism.  I can see the value in such a system if parents chose on their own to pay for the service, although the issue there would be security rather than truancy.  Having the government tag kids and track their movements is, well, creepy … as is the news that others are asking about the service.  I wonder if those tags could get tracked by more people than just the schools — say, people who have a more malicious interest in the location of vulnerable children.  Big Brother isn’t the only danger, after all.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Spawn graduates from high school in a little over two weeks.
Thank G-d.
Children belong to their PARENTS-not the GOVERNMENT!

annoyinglittletwerp on May 1, 2012 at 6:37 PM

Errr… what’s wrong with requiring welfare applicants to take drug tests?

If you don’t want to be tested, don’t apply for welfare, seems pretty simple to me.

Rebar on May 1, 2012 at 6:40 PM

Rebar on May 1, 2012 at 6:40 PM

I spent a few months on food stamps during the late 1990′s-and I would have had ZERO problem with being tested for drugs.
My comment was in reference to the school uniforms with the gps’s.

annoyinglittletwerp on May 1, 2012 at 6:43 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on May 1, 2012 at 6:43 PM

Yes, but I was specifically addressing the video, not your statement.

Sorry for the confusion.

Rebar on May 1, 2012 at 6:46 PM

No problem with this at all.

Ugly on May 1, 2012 at 6:48 PM

I spent a few months on food stamps during the late 1990′s

annoyinglittletwerp on May 1, 2012 at 6:43 PM

Who knew? ALT – welfare queen! =D

Kelligan on May 1, 2012 at 6:50 PM

The only nanny I would listen to is one that is a 10.

docflash on May 1, 2012 at 6:50 PM

Certainly makes it harder to skip school!

Stoic Patriot on May 1, 2012 at 6:50 PM

Kelligan on May 1, 2012 at 6:50 PM

Every time I used my ‘Link’ card to buy groceries-I was apologizing to everyone within earshot.

annoyinglittletwerp on May 1, 2012 at 6:53 PM

Rebar on May 1, 2012 at 6:40 PM

Ditto. What? We are OK with tax dollars being used to purchase drugs?

Was reading somewhere (Wired, maybe?) where judges are offering drug and alcohol offenders a choice between jail and probation… with the stipulation that are subject to 24×7 random urine testing, and must report to the lab within one hour of getting the call to give their sample. Participants report that “the fear of the phone ringing makes it impossible to enjoy the buzz,” so they refrain. All for it.

VastRightWingConspirator on May 1, 2012 at 6:54 PM

public schools have begun tracking thousands of 4-to-14-year-olds with GPS-embedded uniforms.

Thus killing the job of scores of Moms.

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on May 1, 2012 at 6:54 PM

I pee in a cup so I can purchase life insurance. Yet my Gov. Deal, is a bad idea guy because he wants to pee test recipients for public assistance. Not sure I get the logic.

Bmore on May 1, 2012 at 6:57 PM

So basically they can track whether a kid’s shirt made it to school that day. Some enterprising young pupil could probably figure a way around that. Put it in some other kid’s backpack, unawares. Commit a crime and have an alibi! It’s perfect!

jdpaz on May 1, 2012 at 6:57 PM

Every time I used my ‘Link’ card to buy groceries-I was apologizing to everyone within earshot.

annoyinglittletwerp on May 1, 2012 at 6:53 PM

Oh I’m not condeming you for it – that part “a few months” is how the system should be used if we must have it.

Kelligan on May 1, 2012 at 7:01 PM

To test ALL welfare recipients’ urine would cost more than any potential savings by eliminating some doping benefits users.

Fiscally stupid move.

profitsbeard on May 1, 2012 at 7:06 PM

Kelligan on May 1, 2012 at 7:01 PM

I know you weren’t. I saw the smiley. *grin*

annoyinglittletwerp on May 1, 2012 at 7:07 PM

Certainly makes it harder to skip school!

Stoic Patriot on May 1, 2012 at 6:50 PM

How? Just take the chip out and stick it in your desk. The only danger is that, if a lot do that, then next year it’s subcutaneous.

The War Planner on May 1, 2012 at 7:11 PM

No problem with this at all.

Ugly on May 1, 2012 at 6:48 PM

…Ditto..it should be a requirement in every state.
(How long before the trolls are here protesting about dignity, heartlessness, etc.?)

KOOLAID2 on May 1, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Every time I used my ‘Link’ card to buy groceries-I was apologizing to everyone within earshot.

No reason at all to apologize if you truly needed it!

On the other hand, I knew friends of friends in college who would smoke pot throughout the week and received food stamps cause it was “free money”. That pissed me off even as a 19 year old college student.

nextgen_repub on May 1, 2012 at 7:41 PM

Any time Bloomberg doesn’t this award is proof the fix must be in.

xkaydet65 on May 1, 2012 at 7:44 PM

They don’t track children, they track T-Shirts. How much did they spend on this?

Dollayo on May 1, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Errr… what’s wrong with requiring welfare applicants to take drug tests?

Rebar on May 1, 2012 at 6:40 PM

I agree. I have no objection with a so-called “nanny state” to individuals who live off of taxpayer funds.

If you legitimately need assistance, fine. However, the government should take reasonable steps to minimize fraud.

Kingfisher on May 1, 2012 at 8:11 PM

but this month the freakiest controllers come to us from a Brazilian city where public schools have begun tracking thousands of 4-to-14-year-olds with GPS-embedded uniforms. (At least they’re not tagging the kiddos’ ears!)

Give them time. Liberals’ pursuit of power knows no bounds.

Kingfisher on May 1, 2012 at 8:13 PM

We’ve got Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal demanding clean urine in exchange for welfare benefits

This is bad… How?

WeekendAtBernankes on May 1, 2012 at 8:27 PM

I appreciate Reason, but many of the Nannyism were “eh.” I mean, you hand your kid over to the state to be educated and cared for, you get a state mandated uniform, and then you throw up your arms when they track your kids?

MeatHeadinCA on May 1, 2012 at 8:38 PM

They don’t track children, they track T-Shirts. How much did they spend on this?

Dollayo on May 1, 2012 at 7:46 PM

One has to wonder if there would be as much outrage if the school handed out free cellphones.

MeatHeadinCA on May 1, 2012 at 8:40 PM

Oh sure, that’ll work, kids would never think to get a second identical shirt without a chip and change at school.

Like the infringement’s of our second amendment, it harms the law abiding and does nothing to those who would break the law anyway.

Speakup on May 1, 2012 at 9:33 PM

What is wrong with the paleo diet? I don’t get why someone should get busted for that??? That is nannyism to the nth degree.

chai on May 1, 2012 at 9:36 PM

chai on May 1, 2012 at 9:36 PM

Agreed. I have been living my own incarnation of the Paleo diet for over a year now. I lost 40 pounds in 4 months and have had zero trouble keeping it off without ever being hungry. This is a lifestyle change I can handle forever. Could not be happier!

stvnscott on May 1, 2012 at 10:06 PM

Welfare drug tests don’t work. Not only they are prohibitively costly, they also create a profitable market for child urine.

Archivarix on May 1, 2012 at 11:37 PM

Newsflash: Deterrents produce deterrence.

Who knew?

I don’t care if someone is opposed to drug laws, a person should prove they are clean if they want the government dole money. Deal.

The GPS-tagged clothing is a danger to those kids. Unless military-grade encryption and signal-switching is employed, it is virtually impossible to secure the signals. The codes can be scanned as they transmit if you are close enough, and then any of those children can be followed.

Freelancer on May 2, 2012 at 12:20 AM

I call Bravo Sierra on the “GPS chips”

they’re more like RFID tags. RFID tags are like the old crystal radios..they require an outside radio-based power source, and have no internal power. they take the power they get in from a radio signal and use it to transmit back a reply. they also have a range which is very limited (the square of their antenna length, if I remember my research)

for these things to be “GPS chips” they’d have to have a power source..which the kids could unplug…thus making them useless. and even if they WERE GPS chips..the kids know about them and will ditch their uniforms in order to throw off the tracking.

more likely the truancy officer has the transmitter/receiver that causes the RFID chips to chirp back. he drives around listening for a return transmission from an RFID chip, then goes on a search for the kid in question…and finds a shirt neatly folded and hidden in a box or something for later retrieval.

warhorse_03826 on May 2, 2012 at 3:38 AM

Errr… what’s wrong with requiring welfare applicants to take drug tests?

If you don’t want to be tested, don’t apply for welfare, seems pretty simple to m

It turned out that drug testing all welfare applicants will cost a lot more than it will save from denying welfare to a minority of people who fail it.

V-rod on May 2, 2012 at 11:11 AM

It turned out that drug testing all welfare applicants will cost a lot more than it will save from denying welfare to a minority of people who fail it.

V-rod on May 2, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Thanks for clearing that up.

WeekendAtBernankes on May 2, 2012 at 11:29 AM