A Recommitment to Founding Principles
At America 250, our nation has the opportunity to recommit to its founding ideals.
In his monthly Substack newsletter, FREOPP president, Akash Chougule, wrote:
The purpose of government is not to give us our livelihoods, but to protect the freedom to live them. The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were not blueprints for a managed welfare state. They were a framework for ordered liberty: one that trusted free people, free markets, free communities, and free families to drive progress and create prosperity in ways no central authority ever could.
As the nation celebrates its 250th birthday, we find ourselves at a fork in the road. One path takes us on the continued road of today’s politics seeking to sow disdain for our neighbor, fracture our communities, and prioritize headlines over solutions.
The other offers a path “to recommit,” wrote Chougule. “The ideas in our founding documents are not relics. They are the answer to the question of how a nation built on freedom can remain worthy of it.”
We at FREOPP see this weekend as an opportunity. We’re ready to commit for America’s next 250. Are you?
Republicans actually do have a health care plan, and it’s a good one
Incorporating bipartisan priorities, the Fair Care Act is needed health care reform, especially for poorer Americans.
Why it matters: Health care affordability remains one of the most pressing challenges facing American families. Premiums, deductibles, and taxpayer-funded health spending continue to rise, even as many Americans report difficulty accessing affordable coverage. Policymakers face growing pressure to lower costs without reducing access to care or limiting patient choice.
What we found: America's health insurance system is built around employer-sponsored coverage, a model that limits consumer choice and ties health insurance to employment status. While the Affordable Care Act expanded coverage, many families continue to face rising premiums and out-of-pocket costs. A more sustainable approach would give individuals greater ownership of their health insurance, expand competition among insurers, and provide targeted assistance to those with the highest medical expenses. The Fair Care Act seeks to accomplish these goals while preserving protections for people with preexisting conditions and reducing barriers to affordable coverage.
Key policy findings:
Employer-sponsored insurance distorts the health insurance market and limits consumer choice.
Many Americans remain uninsured or underinsured despite significant government spending on health care.
Individually owned insurance can increase portability and give consumers greater control over their coverage decisions.
Risk-adjustment and reinsurance mechanisms can help lower premiums while protecting access for individuals with costly medical conditions.
Greater competition among insurers can help reduce costs and improve the quality of available coverage.
What policymakers should do: Congress should pursue reforms that make health insurance more affordable, portable, and consumer-driven. Policymakers should create a more level playing field between employer-sponsored and individually purchased coverage, strengthen market-stabilization tools that lower premiums, and expand opportunities for Americans to choose plans that best fit their needs. Reforms should prioritize affordability and access while preserving protections for those with significant health care needs.
Americans need opportunity abundance
An abundance of training, jobs, housing, and support will help Americans achieve upward mobility.
Why it matters: Too many policy debates focus on how wealth should be distributed rather than how prosperity is created in the first place. As Americans face challenges ranging from housing affordability to workforce participation and economic mobility, policymakers must decide whether to prioritize policies that foster growth and opportunity or policies that primarily redistribute existing resources. The answer matters most for those on the bottom half of the economic ladder, who benefit most when pathways to upward mobility are strong.
What we found: Economic prosperity is not a fixed pie. Individuals, families, businesses, and communities create value when they are free to innovate, work, invest, and solve problems. Work provides more than a paycheck—it offers dignity, purpose, and a path toward self-sufficiency. Likewise, entrepreneurial success often generates opportunities for workers, investors, and entire communities rather than benefiting only those at the top. Policies that strengthen opportunity and growth are more likely to produce lasting prosperity than those centered primarily on redistribution.
Policy points:
Economic growth and upward mobility depend on creating conditions that encourage work, entrepreneurship, investment, and innovation.
Strong safety nets should help people through hardship while supporting pathways to independence and self-sufficiency.
Work is associated with greater financial stability, purpose, and social well-being, making workforce participation a critical component of opportunity.
Wealth creation often benefits far more people than just business owners, including employees, suppliers, retirees, and investors.
Free markets, strong institutions, and economic freedom have historically been among the most effective drivers of poverty reduction and social mobility.
What policymakers should do: Policymakers should focus on expanding opportunity rather than redistributing scarcity. That means removing barriers to work, encouraging entrepreneurship, supporting workforce development, increasing housing and energy abundance, and maintaining a safety net that promotes upward mobility rather than long-term dependency. Government has an important role to play, but its most effective role is creating the conditions in which individuals, families, and communities can thrive.
Recognize: Modernizing Child Protection Through Predictive Risk Modeling
Today's child protection requires modern tools to better support the people carrying the weight of it.
Why it matters: Child protection agencies make some of the most consequential decisions in government, often under conditions of uncertainty and limited information. Every day, caseworkers must determine which children face the greatest risk of abuse, neglect, or future harm. When these decisions are based on incomplete data or inconsistent assessments, vulnerable children can be overlooked while limited resources are directed toward lower-risk cases. Improving decision-making in child protection is essential to ensuring that children receive timely intervention when they need it most.
What we found: Modern child welfare systems collect vast amounts of information but often lack the tools to use that data effectively. Predictive risk modeling offers a way to help caseworkers identify patterns associated with future maltreatment, allowing agencies to better distinguish high-risk cases from lower-risk ones. These tools are not intended to replace professional judgment; rather, they provide additional information that can improve consistency, accuracy, and accountability in child protection decision-making. When implemented responsibly, predictive analytics can help agencies allocate resources more effectively and improve outcomes for children.
Key policy findings:
Child welfare agencies often possess extensive data but lack the analytical capabilities needed to translate that information into actionable insights.
Predictive risk models can identify patterns associated with future abuse or neglect more consistently than unaided human judgment alone.
Predictive analytics should serve as a decision-support tool for caseworkers, not a replacement for professional discretion and expertise.
Successful implementation requires transparency, ongoing evaluation, and safeguards to mitigate bias and ensure fairness.
Better use of data can help agencies focus limited resources on children facing the greatest risk while reducing unnecessary interventions in lower-risk cases.
What policymakers should do: Policymakers should modernize child welfare data systems and support the responsible use of predictive risk modeling as part of a broader effort to strengthen child protection. States should invest in integrated data infrastructure, establish rigorous standards for transparency and accountability, and regularly evaluate predictive tools for effectiveness and bias. By combining advanced analytics with professional judgment, child welfare agencies can make more informed decisions, improve child safety, and ensure that resources are directed where they can have the greatest impact.
From false choices to real solutions in child welfare policy
Family supports and child protection should not come from the same goverment agency.
Why it matters: Child welfare policy is often framed as a choice between protecting children and preserving families. In reality, both goals are essential. When policymakers embrace false tradeoffs, children can be left in dangerous situations, while families in need of support may struggle to access effective services. A well-functioning child welfare system must protect children from harm while ensuring that families receive the right help from the right institutions at the right time.
What we found: Recent debates have expanded the definition of child welfare far beyond its traditional role of responding to abuse and neglect. While family stability and economic security are important, child welfare agencies are not designed to serve as broad social service providers. Efforts to transform child welfare into a catch-all "well-being" system risk diverting resources and attention away from child protection while creating confusion about accountability. Effective policy requires distinguishing between child protection, family strengthening, and poverty alleviation, with each function led by the institutions best equipped to carry it out.
Key policy findings:
Child welfare systems exist primarily to protect children from abuse and neglect, not to serve as the primary administrator of the social safety net.
Conflating poverty with neglect can lead to ineffective policy responses that fail to address the root causes of child maltreatment.
Many serious cases of neglect involve factors such as addiction, mental illness, domestic violence, and family instability that require targeted interventions beyond financial assistance alone.
Families are best served when support systems are clearly defined, coordinated, and accessible without unnecessary government intrusion.
Strong communities, faith institutions, social service providers, and public agencies all have distinct roles to play in promoting child safety and family well-being.
What policymakers should do: Policymakers should strengthen child protection systems while improving coordination among the broader network of institutions that support families. Child welfare agencies should remain focused on their core mission of protecting children from abuse and neglect, while poverty reduction, workforce development, mental health treatment, and family support services are delivered through the systems best designed for those purposes. Clear lines of responsibility, stronger accountability, and a renewed focus on child safety can help move the debate beyond false choices and toward real solutions.
Thanks for keeping up with FREOPP, and have a great week celebrating America 250!
FREOPP’s work is made possible by people like you, who share our belief that equal opportunity is central to the American Dream. Please join them by making a donation today.