There’s the wink, there’s the nudge – and eventually, there’s the shove. It’s an entirely predictable progression, and when the Obama administration established an office dedicated to “nudging” Americans into making the right choices – at least according to the administration – it was only a matter of time before nudging wasn’t enough.

“The nickname is ‘nudging – the idea that policymakers can change people’s behavior just by presenting choices or information differently,” Politico reported. “The classic example is requiring people to opt out of being an organ donor, instead of opting in, when they sign up for a driver’s license. Without any change in rules, the small tweak has boosted the number of registered organ donors in many states.”

It’s hard to argue with organ donation. But not all of the office’s targets are quite so altruistic. Some are ideological. Some are very, very disturbing.

“The nudge team tried this out on doctors, sending letters to physicians who prescribed far more medications than their peers informing them of their abnormally high prescription rates,” Politico revealed.

Do we even need to explain what’s wrong with that? Policy wonks in a D.C. office are not the best judge of what a doctor should prescribe. There are many possible reasons for a physician prescribing medications on the higher end of the bell curve – that doctor may work in a long-term care facility, for example, or in an area with a higher-than-normal instance of environmental illness.

It’s not for the White House’s Office of Social and Behavioral Science Team (the nudgers) to second-guess physicians, based on statistical models.

And that’s just the first reason the nudge is dangerous. Washington doesn’t always know what’s best for us.

Last year, Dripping Springs school district used the nudge justification to institute “Meatless Mondays,” in an effort to get kids to eat more healthy meals. But is meatless really more healthy? Don’t look to the government for guidance on that. It still relies on outdated models and recommendations.

“Take a look at the food pyramid still promoted by the Agriculture Department – a high-carbohydrate recipe that claims to offer a healthy diet. Studies show that carbs cause obesity, but the government still pushes its old message which is a guaranteed way to gain weight,” Investors Business Daily noted.

That didn’t stop Dripping Springs; based on government science, it didn’t encourage kids to make the right choice (it had been doing that all along). It took away all of their choices – but the “right” one.

This demonstrates the larger issue here. Nudging is never enough. When education programs and “choice architecture” fail to meet the unreasonably high expectations of government planners, the planners invariably resort to coercion.

Former Texas Agricultural Commissioner Todd Staples said it well, in response to Meatless Mondays.

“For those Texans who choose not to eat meat, I say more power to you,” he wrote in the Austin American-Statesman. “However, we cannot force such an agenda-driven diet on anyone who has not chosen such a diet especially our school children.”

The nudge is always followed by the shove.