Revenge Is a Dish Best Served on Live TV

September 30, 2008

(Guest post by Greg Forster)

Joe Biden wishes Bret Stephens didn’t have such a long memory:

Debate Questions for Joe Biden

Finally, senator, something from the more distant past. In 1981, at the outset of the Reagan administration, you took the lead in cross-examining William ‘Judge’ Clark for his confirmation hearings for deputy secretary of state. Mr. Clark’s job was explicitly intended to be managerial, not policy oriented. Nevertheless, you asked him for the names of the prime ministers of South Africa and Zimbabwe, both of which were second-tier posts in presidential systems.

In the same spirit, Sen. Biden, and as a longstanding leader of the Foreign Relations Committee, can you give us the names of the prime minister of France and the president of Germany? Just to be clear here, senator, I am not referring to President Sarkozy and Chancellor Merkel.

Ouch!

Too bad we Americans never developed a tradition of real debate in politics. The only reason you’ve heard of the Lincoln/Douglas debates is because they’re unique. People might actually tune in and watch – even at 9:00 on a Friday night – if there were some prospect of interesting questions being asked. But there isn’t. And that’s why even this Thursday’s VP debate is likely to be anti-climactic.

Having picked on Joe Biden, which is too easy anyway, I’ll now show my spirit of evenhandedness (and also bring this blog post back to an educational topic) by picking on Sarah Palin.

Suppose there were some prospect of Sarah Palin being asked the following questions:

Governor Palin, during your term you have developed a working alliance with Alaska’s teacher union – throwing more money at schools even with no prospect of improvement, opposing real reforms like school choice, and shifting state funds into archaic and unaffordable “defined benefit” pension plans that you actually opposed when you ran for governor. In return, the state and national unions have praised you, and the state union stayed out of the governor’s race, effectively endorsing your candidacy.

Do you agree with Senator McCain that school choice “is a fundamental and essential right we should honor for all parents”?

If a constitutional provision such as Alaska’s bigoted Blaine Amendment (your excuse for opposing vouchers as governor) violates people’s “fundamental and essential rights,” which should prevail?

Do you agree with Senator McCain that Obama’s opposition to vouchers is “tired rhetoric” that “went over well with the teachers union” but leaves children “stuck in failing schools,” and that “no entrenched bureaucracy or union should deny parents that choice and children that opportunity”?

Do you agree with Senator McCain that it is “beyond hypocritical that many of those who would refuse to allow public school parents to choose their child’s school would never agree to force their own children into a school that did not work or was unsafe”?

Whom do you think he is talking about when he says that?

Do you think this would be a better country if we had that kind of debate?

Of course, we would need to have politicians who could give as good as they got. As in:

Biden: Mr. Stephens, I asked that question because I thought it was important. If Mr. Clark felt the question was unfair, he could have just said so. In that spirit, if I need to know the name of the prime minister of France when I’m vice president, it will probably be because I’m going to his funeral, in which case I’m sure I’ll have no trouble finding out the name before I show up.

Or:

Palin: Mr. Forster, as governor, I don’t have the privilege of rewriting the state constitution at will. I have to govern according to the laws as they are. I’m glad that bloggers like you have the freedom to call those laws into question. And I suppose being governor of the nation’s largest state is a little bit like being a blogger . . . except that I have actual responsibilities.

Think either of them would be up to that kind of answer?

2 Comments | politics, vouchers | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Greg Forster

The Arkansas Lottery Lock Box

September 23, 2008

Arkansas’ Lt. Governor, Bill Halter, has staked his political fortunes on a constitutional amendment creating a state lottery.  Halter has urged adoption of the lottery to increase funds for college scholarships and K-12 teacher bonuses.  All of the money, he emphasizes, will be used to increase education spending: “The bill specified that revenue generated by the lottery would expand, not replace, existing education funding.”

Promising that lottery dollars will be earmarked for increasing education spending is a common strategy to expand political support.  But of course it is impossible to guarantee that lottery proceeds would supplement and not substitute for spending.  Dollars are fungible, so it is always possible that lottery dollars would replace dollars from other sources that would have been used to fund increases.  That is, as long as education spending goes up (as it consistently has in the past), who’s to say whether those increases would not have occurred anyway without the lottery?  The lottery money could just free what would have been spent on education to be spent on something else.  That is, lotteries are basically just general tax increases even if it is claimed that the revenue is targeted for a particular purpose.  (See for example Spindler, 2003)

So, if lotteries are just another tax increase and not a free way to increase education spending, are they a good way to increase taxes?  Well, the tax burden from lotteries falls disproportionately on the poor and disadvantaged.  Supporters of progressive taxation shouldn’t be very interested in lotteries. 

On the other hand, some people enjoy gambling and want lotteries.  Liberty concerns would probably favor permitting gambling.  But a state operated lottery is effectively a local gambling monopoly, which lovers of liberty should dislike.  I guess the question is whether a monopoly is better than a prohibition as far as liberty goes.

However you slice it, the lottery isn’t a great deal.  There is no lock box into which the lottery dollars go to ensure that they increase education spending and cannot substitute for other dollars.  Lotteries are a regressive tax.  And lotteries barely increase liberty because they are operated as local monopolies.  Bill Halter may want to find a new issue to make his political fortune.

1 Comment | politics | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Jay P. Greene

I Miss Bill

September 22, 2008

I miss Bill. 

I miss significant expansions in free trade, like with the passage of NAFTA.  Instead, under Bush we’ve had new tariffs on steel, tariffs on underwear, and protectionism on catfish.

I miss welfare reform that encouraged work and discouraged irresponsible behavior.  Instead, under Bush we’ve just had $1 trillion in corporate socialism that simply transfers wealth from taxpayers who didn’t work for or invest with reckless financial institutions to the people who do.  Doing so discourages work and rewards irresponsible behavior.

I miss low inflation and unemployment partially sustained by fiscal restraint.  Instead, under Bush we’ve had runaway government spending with rising inflation and unemployment.

I miss an articulate, well-crafted speech that inspires us to support promising government efforts.  Instead, under Bush… well, you know.

Of course, divided government may have helped shape Clinton’s agenda and deserves some of the credit.  And of course, presidents can’t take full credit or blame for the economy or world events.  And I certainly wouldn’t say I miss everything about him.  But whoever helped shape Bill, whatever credit doesn’t belong to him, and despite his failings, those were good times and he was a good president.

18 Comments | politics | Tagged: , | Permalink
Posted by Jay P. Greene

The Wolf that Cried Ad Hominem

September 15, 2008

The NY Sun columnist, Andrew Wolf, has posted a long and angry comment, taking exception to Matt Ladner’s post, Little Ramona’s Gone Hillbilly Nuts.  In that post Matt challenged Diane Ravitch’s assertion that Joel Klein, Cory Booker, Michelle Rhee, and Adrian Fenty were seeking to “dismantle public education, piece by piece” by supporting merit pay, reductions in teacher tenure, and charter schools.  Matt observed that these were extra-ordinary charges to make “without presenting a scintilla of supporting evidence.”

But Wolf responds: “I am astounded by the puerile ad hominem attack on Dr. Diane Ravitch that appeared in Jay Greene’s blog. Like all of us, Dr. Ravitch has a right for her opinion to be respected and discussed without opponents resorting to such a childish (and inaccurate) attack. Apparently, Prof. Greene and his band of acolytes can’t muster the intellectual arguments to counter those of Dr. Ravitch, so must resort to this denigration of her scholarship and beliefs.”

I see.  And accusing Klein, Booker, Rhee, and Fenty of seeking to dismantle public education without any supporting evidence is not ad hominem?   

It is not ad hominem to say, as I did in my post on this, that “it is shocking to see these new claims made without any evidence that merit pay, weaker tenure, and charter schools harm public education, let alone destroy it.  Other than the fact that Bloomberg and Klein support these policies, it is not clear why Diane Ravitch opposes them.”  The fact is that Diane Ravitch did not provide evidence to support her claim and it is perfectly within reasonable discourse to point that out. 

If Andrew Wolf wants a substantive discussion rather than ad hominem, how about if he starts by providing the evidence that merit pay, reduced tenure rights, and charter schools “dismantle public education” that Ravitch neglected to provide?

In his own defense, Matt added, “A long and distinguished career does not entitle one to make such reckless and unsupported claims.”

4 Comments | politics, teacher union | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Jay P. Greene

Please, Let It Not be Huckabee

September 15, 2008

Mike Petrilli is thinking ahead over at Flypaper.  He’s trying to figure out who the next secretary of education might be under a McCain or Obama administration. 

He’s got some good guesses but I would only add — Please, let it not be Huckabee. 

Take it from an Arkansan.  Unless you like huge spending increases with little achievement improvement, hostility to vouchers and charters, consolidation of small school districts, and an odd interest in music education which he tried to promote in a conference call with country musicians who all learned music in church and not in school… Huckabee wouldn’t be your pick.

5 Comments | politics | Tagged: | Permalink
Posted by Jay P. Greene

Dogs and Cats Are Living Together

September 12, 2008

Dr. Peter Venkman: This city is headed for a disaster of biblical proportions.
Mayor: What do you mean, “biblical”?
Dr Ray Stantz: What he means is Old Testament, Mr. Mayor, real wrath of God type stuff.
Dr. Peter Venkman: Exactly.
Dr Ray Stantz: Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling!
Dr. Egon Spengler: Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes…
Winston Zeddemore: The dead rising from the grave!
Dr. Peter Venkman: Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together… mass hysteria!

No, this isn’t a photo of Greg, Matt, and me (but if it were, I’m sure I’d be Egon on the right). 

This is what came to mind when I heard that Doug Tuthill, the former head of the teacher union in Pinellas County Florida, was named the new president of the Florida School Choice Fund, an organization that raises money for and promotes tax-credit supported vouchers.  And Jon East, the former St. Pete Times editorial writer and prominent voucher critic, has signed on to be  the Fund’s communications director.  There must be a cataclysm of biblical proportions going on here.  Dogs and cats are living together!

Add this to the Democrats for Education Reform hosting an event at the Democratic Convention where “In front of a gathering of about 500 delegates, four ‘smart, young, powerful, bald** black state and local elected officials’ (Kaus’s description; the asterisks lead to a note conceding the presence of some hair on one guy’s head – but only on the sides) denounce teachers’ unions, explicitly and in strong terms, and recieve vigorous applause. ‘In a room of 500 people at the Democratic convention!’(emphasis in original)  Most satisfying line: “John Wilson, head of the NEA itself, was also there. Afterwards, he seemed a bit stunned.”

Rick Hess, Mike Petrilli, Diane Ravitch, and Sol Stern may be jumping off the school choice train (or at least hanging dangerously off the side), but Adrian Fenty, Marion Bary, Al Sharpton, and a bunch of Democratic delegates are jumping on.  (OK, you can insert your Marion Bary or Al Sharpton joke here).  But these are signs of a possibly dramatic political realignment. 

I wonder what’ll happen if we cross the streams?

2 Comments | politics, tax-credit scholarships, vouchers | Permalink
Posted by Jay P. Greene

Bruce Fuller Knows Better

September 11, 2008

(Guest Post by Matthew Ladner)

In the New York Times campaign blog, Cal-Berkley education professor Bruce Fuller makes some wildly inaccurate assertions.

Fuller asserts:

Yet only three publicly financed voucher programs — Cleveland, Milwaukee and Washington — have survived since the early 1990s.

Fuller needs to check his facts. There are three voucher programs in Ohio alone. Two more in Arizona. Oh, and then there are voucher programs in Utah, Georgia and Louisiana. Oh, and Maine and Vermont. Also Florida. And of course this ignores the nation’s tax credit programs.

Worse still, Fuller writes:

On early education, Republican leaders have been silent, even though quality preschools pack a strong punch in boosting young children’s learning.

This is an artfully written sentence indeed. The phrase “boosting young children’s learning” deftly avoids the question as to whether these gains are ultimately sustained. Fuller himself however wrote the following in opposing Hillary Clinton’s preschool plan:

Three recent studies, conducted with national data on more than 22,000 young children, have shown significant benefits from preschool for poor students, especially those who find their way into higher quality elementary schools. But cognitive gains from preschool quickly fade out for middle-class children; social development slows for those spending long days in centers.

I am reading Fuller’s book Standardized Childhood and must say I’m finding him more credible as a scholar than as a proponent of the Obama campaign.

 

1 Comment | instructional reform, politics, vouchers | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by matthewladner

Palin and Fundamentalist Muslims? More than Lipstick

September 9, 2008

Juan Cole has an awful piece on Salon this morning “What’s the difference between Palin and Muslim fundamentalists? Lipstick.”

A friend of mine commented: “Hmmmmm….well, lipstick, and the whole blowing up innocent people thing…. personally, its the blowing up people that gets me a bit upset about radical Islam, but hey, that’s me.”

Another friend noted: “So if this is what Juan Cole really thinks, why does he support one set of fundamentalists (the ones with suicide belts) and not the other (the ones with lipstick)?”

(edited to correct source as Salon)

4 Comments | politics | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Jay P. Greene

PJM on Merit Pay in D.C.

September 8, 2008

(Guest post by Greg Forster)

Today, Pajamas Media carries my column on Michelle Rhee’s push for a limited, voluntary merit pay system in Washington D.C.:

To see how much has changed, just consider the amazing fact that about one out of every three public-school students in D.C. attends a charter school — government-owned but non-unionized, privately operated, and (most important of all) chosen by parents — instead of a regular public school. “We lost 6,000 students last year,” says Parker, referring to the number of students who moved from regular schools to charters. Six thousand students is over 13% of the city’s remaining enrollment in regular public schools — in one year.

Rhee isn’t the force behind charter schools or vouchers in D.C. She’s in charge of the regular public system. But the same widespread mandate for reform that made charters and vouchers successful have allowed Rhee to succeed with reforms like closing schools that were only there to create patronage jobs, introducing curriculum innovation, and taking on the unbelievable amount of bureaucratic waste in the system. And as vouchers and charters have sent a message that the system can’t take students for granted any more, the pressure for reform has only increased — strengthening Rhee’s hand.

By coincidence, the Washington Post‘s Marc Fisher has a column today emphasizing how the explosion of charter schools in D.C. was decisive in bringing the unions to the bargaining table, even on the issue of reforming the structure of teacher pay. Just as competition from globalization forced the private sector unions to start the long, slow process of giving up the ridiculous extravegances that they won from management in the 1960s and 1970s, thus rescuing the American economy from disaster, now competition in schooling is forcing the teachers’ unions to start the same process of giving up their own ridiculous extravegances – the biggest of all being a system of hiring, firing and pay that bears no serious relationship to job performance.

Leave a Comment » | charter schools, competitive effects, politics, teacher pay, teacher quality, teacher union, vouchers | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Greg Forster

Little Ramona’s Gone Hillbilly Nuts

September 7, 2008

(Guest Post by Matthew Ladner)

The Nashville y’alternative band BR549 wrote a great song about a woman who used to be a punk rocker, but changes into a hardcore country and western enthusiast. The lyrics describe the conversion:

She done traded in her Doc’s for kicker boots
Safety-pinned tee shirts for Manuel Suits
Her hair’s grown out and it’s piled up high
She only shows her tattoos one at a time
She ain’t ashamed of the way she was
She hears old Hank, she can’t get enough
Her punk rock records are gathering dust
‘Cos little Ramona’s gone hillbilly nuts

This song involuntarily comes to mind every time I read a blog post by Diane Ravitch like this one. It could just be me, but Ravitch’s dislike for NYC Chancellor Joel Klein seems to have gone beyond the pale.

Let’s assume that Klein has spent gobs more money without getting much in the way of results. That is a matter of dispute, and I don’t have a dog in that fight. But even if it were true, Klein would have plenty of company: spending more money with flat academic achievement is about par for the course of American education over the last thirty plus years. For instance, the NAEP long term reading scale score for 17 year olds was precisely the same in 1971 and 2004.

Nationally, real spending per pupil doubled during that same period. As sorry as that record is, you could be rightly dismissed as nuts if you tried to argue that the nation’s public school leaders were out to destroy public education. Klein doesn’t support vouchers-so there’s no story there, even for inhabitants of the anti-voucher fever swamps. He does support charter schools, but charter schools are public schools and support for charters is well within the mainstream of the Democratic Party. And yet Ms. Ravitch writes:

So this is the strange new era we are embarked upon, in which the mantle of “reformer” has passed to those who would dismantle public education, piece by piece.

What seems strange to me is making such a charge against Klein, Booker, Rhee and Fenty without presenting a scintilla of supporting evidence. Stranger still to see someone accused of spending too much money on public schools and of seeking to dismantle public education in a single post.

25 Comments | politics, teacher union | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by matthewladner

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »