Issue date: 1/24/02 Section: Opinion

After petitioning the Justice Department for funds, Senator Lois Capps (D-Cal) has expanded the "Liberty Tattoo Removal Program" of San Luis Obispo County. The program will operate in part on $50,000 in federal monies that every U.S. taxpayer pays. This is a sad use for the word "Liberty" and shows just how out of control the idea of entitlement has gone.

The free service will be aimed at the unemployed and former gang members. The procedure uses a laser to break up the ink within the skin until it is dissolvable by the body. Eligible persons must have tattoos that "interfere with their daily lives" and must promise not to get any other tattoos. In addition, applicants must complete 16 hours of community service, a punishment usually reserved for convicted law breakers, not people who have exercised their right to free speech in getting a tattoo. Senator Capps justifies the federal spending by stating that persons with tattoos are often discriminated against in job hiring and promoting situations. She may be right.

Many employers will not hire applicants to positions that interact with their customers if the applicant has visible tattoos. Even worse, people are gawked at, even ridiculed for their sometimes offensive body art. Studies have also shown who men prefer to hire women with larger breasts, and discriminate against those that do not possess them. Should women with small breasts be entitled to free breast enlargement to better their chances of being hired? Taxpayers should not foot the bill when John Q. Ex-thug decides the flaming swastika on his elbow was a mistake.

Once he has taken on the responsibility to pay for a tattoo, he has taken on the responsibility to pay for the consequences, whether they are social or financial. Former gang members should not have the most visible reminder of their violent past erased by the government. Recovering hardened criminals need permanent reminders, not just memories as to what their lives had been like with crime.

The idea of tattoo removal at taxpayer expense has been exported beyond California to numerous U.S. cities and even to Canada. Last summer, Manitoba's (Canada) Attorney General Gord Mackintosh refused to introduce such a program in his jurisdiction. "We're not going to prioritize cosmetic surgery at taxpayer expense," Mackintosh said. "Why should the public pay to remove a tattoo the person paid to put on? I have a real problem with that, in general."

Dressing up the name of the program with the term "Liberty" is one of the greatest misnomers of all time. It is enough to make the Founding Fathers and every soldier that has died since then spin in their graves. These programs need to be curtailed before any reason that makes one person different from another that causes social discomfort is changed to the "norm" by the federal government. It is logical to say that if this trend continues, there will be federal programs for subsidizing plastic surgery, hair styling, even wardrobe changes.

Some wise advice to those considering potentially offensive tattoos -- stick with temporaries.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools