Patriotic Education or Federal Overreach? With Chester (Checker) Finn

Posted on by Susan Pendergrass

Susan Pendergrass speaks with Chester (Checker) Finn, Distinguished Senior Fellow and President Emeritus at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, about the recent federal executive order Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling. They discuss the balance between patriotic education and federal overreach, the limits on Washington’s role in curriculum, the latest NAEP scores, and more.

Read Checker’s piece here: “Trump should stay out of what students learn in school”

Listen on Spotify

Listen on Apple Podcasts 

Listen on SoundCloud

Timestamps: 

03:00 The Current State of American Education
06:11 Federal Role in Education: Weaponization vs. Minimization
08:56 Reading Proficiency Crisis Among Students
11:57 Impact of Disbanding the Department of Education
15:03 The Need for Stronger Accountability in Education
17:59 School Choice and Funding Challenges
21:03 Optimism and Pessimism in Education’s Future
24:03 Addressing Chronic Absenteeism and Disconnected Youth

Download a transcript of this episode here. 

Produced by Show-Me Opportunity

Medicaid’s Checkup: Part 3

Posted on by Elias Tsapelas

Now that I’ve covered how expensive Medicaid expansion has proven to be, it’s time to explain why things may be even worse than they seem.

In part two of this series, I briefly mentioned that in Missouri’s recent period of overwhelming Medicaid growth, the only eligibility category that had a reduction in enrollment is people with disabilities. Today, there are approximately 125,000 disabled Missourians enrolled in the Medicaid program, which is down 50,000 since its peak in 2023, down 25,000 since 2019, and is actually lower than at any point in the past 20 years (which is as far back as the data goes).

What could possibly explain this sudden shift? One explanation, as I referenced in part one, is that Missouri is still catching up on processing thousands of program eligibility redeterminations that were paused for several years during COVID-19. But the problem with that theory is that you wouldn’t expect many people with disabilities to lose Medicaid coverage once they qualify. They, unlike several other populations such as healthy adults or pregnant women, are less likely to only need coverage temporarily or just until they can get back to work. This is why I think it’s likely that disabled individuals are simply receiving their coverage through different means.

One way this could happen is through what I’ve called “PTD shifting,” which is something that I’ve been warning about since early 2020. PTD (permanent total disability) shifting was a key component of Medicaid expansion supporters’ claims that adopting the proposal would be costless for Missouri taxpayers. PTD shifting occurs when states exploit the way Medicaid is financed to shift a significant portion of disabled enrollees’ costs to the federal government. Given that people with disabilities often have a variety of complex medical issues, providing them health coverage can be very expensive, which in turn means that shifting these high costs to the federal government could save states a lot of money. The problem is that the federal government has explicitly stated numerous times that this practice is not allowed.

To be clear, I don’t have any definitive proof that Missouri’s Medicaid agency is doing anything wrong, but the latest program enrollment data should be raising some eyebrows. If my fears are confirmed, and Missouri is practicing PTD shifting, state taxpayers might soon be on the hook for an enormous Medicaid bill. This is because once the federal government discovers a state has been wrongfully receiving extra federal funds to support its Medicaid program, the feds could require state taxpayers to pay them back, which in this case could amount to hundreds of millions of dollars.

Needless to say, Missouri’s Medicaid program deserves a closer look from our state’s elected officials as soon as possible. The longer it takes to get to the bottom of what’s going on, the more difficult and expensive the fix is likely to be.

On Hold for Telemedicine

Posted on by Elias Tsapelas

After a disappointing end to the 2024 legislative session, when Missouri’s policymakers missed the call for telemedicine reform, there’s reason to hold on to hope that 2025 will yield different results.

Once again, several bills have been filed that would drastically improve Missouri’s telemedicine laws. As I’ve written before, Missouri was one of the best places in the country for telemedicine a few short years ago. Patients and providers were given a plethora of options for how they communicated, which greatly expanded access to health services across Missouri. But after the emergency declaration for COVID-19 ended, Missouri reinstated a variety of measures that needlessly restrict telemedicine access.

According to a report from the Cicero Institute, Missouri’s telemedicine laws are lacking in three key areas. First, our state is not what Cicero calls “modality neutral.” What this means is that Missouri’s telemedicine laws don’t allow for several modes of communication that have shown to be successful in other states. At least one bill filed this year attempts to move our laws closer to modality neutral by allowing telemedicine services to be provided via audio-only (not video) technologies. This is something mental health providers are very interested in.

Second, Missouri restricts telemedicine access across state lines. If you’re in St. Louis and need a doctor, why shouldn’t you be able to see a provider over telemedicine who practices in Illinois? With so many Missourians struggling to find the healthcare they need, expanding telemedicine access to any licensed provider who’s willing to treat Missourians seems like it should be a no-brainer.

Finally, Missouri makes it unnecessarily difficult for providers to write prescriptions for their patients, especially if they’ve only ever seen them over telemedicine. The process is even more cumbersome if the provider is an advanced practice registered nurse (ARPN). Clarifying the prescribing process and making it easier for APRNs to treat patients via telemedicine should be a benefit to both patients and providers. Fortunately, there are several bills filed this year that tackle these issues.

It’s time for Missouri’s elected officials to recognize that it’s not 2019 anymore. Telemedicine has come an incredibly long way in recent years, yet Missouri’s laws still treat the service as if things are the same as they were pre-COVID-19. Hopefully, this is the year Missouri’s policymakers take notice and take the actions necessary to expand telemedicine access.

2025 Economic Trends for the U.S. and Missouri with Aaron Hedlund and Elijah Haahr

Posted on by Aaron Hedlund

In December 2024, in Springfield, Missouri, the Show-Me Institute and Show-Me Opportunity hosted an event featuring Dr. Aaron Hedlund, Chief Economist at the Show-Me Institute, and Elijah Haahr, former Missouri Speaker of the House and host of The Elijah Haahr Show on KWTO.

The discussion focused on the 2025 economic outlook for Missouri and the U.S., exploring issues such as unsustainable government spending, the growing national debt, and the Federal Reserve’s role in shaping inflation, housing, and labor markets.

This episode is a recording of that event.

Listen on Spotify

Listen on Apple Podcasts 

Listen on SoundCloud

Produced by Show-Me Opportunity

Celebrate Educational Freedom: A Lesson from Florida

Posted on by James V. Shuls

I recently learned that Florida was ranked first on the 2025 ALEC Index of State Education Freedom. That ranking did not surprise me. What surprised me was who posted it—the Florida Department of Education (DOE). The Florida DOE and the state’s education commissioner were celebrating the state’s ranking.

Florida’s embrace of educational freedom is no accident. It reflects decades of policy decisions prioritizing parental choice and innovation. From robust charter school laws to universal education savings accounts, Florida has created an ecosystem that empowers families to choose what works best for their children. It’s no wonder it tops the list.

Missouri ranked fairly well at 14th overall. The Show-Me State was bolstered by its strong showing in homeschooling (tied for first) and virtual education (tied for third). These are bright spots worth celebrating. However, Missouri was dragged down by an F grade in open enrollment laws. While some districts allow students to cross attendance boundaries, there is no statewide policy ensuring families have this option.

This is a missed opportunity. Open enrollment doesn’t just give families more flexibility; it also encourages schools to improve by fostering healthy competition. States like Florida understand this, and their success is a model worth following.

As a longtime advocate for school choice, I’ve been skeptical of Missouri’s new Department of Secondary and Elementary Education (DESE) commissioner, Karla Eslinger. Her record as a member of the legislature and her statements since taking the helm haven’t exactly signaled a bold embrace of educational freedom. However, she has an opportunity to change that perception.

If Commissioner Eslinger wants to demonstrate that she’s serious about putting students first, she should champion policies that expand educational freedom—especially open enrollment. By working to eliminate the barriers that restrict families to specific districts, she could transform Missouri’s education system and move the state up the rankings.

Florida’s celebration of its success on the ALEC Index shows the power of leadership and vision. Missouri should take note. If we want to improve outcomes for students, we must stop clinging to the status quo and embrace educational freedom. Let’s aim for the top of the list and ensure every child in Missouri has access to the education they deserve.

Missouri Public Schools Have a Very Serious Reading Problem

Posted on by Susan Pendergrass

Test scores on the Nation’s Report Card were released on January 29th, and Missouri faces a dire future if we don’t right the ship. The Nation’s Report Card is a biannual assessment given by the U.S. Department of Education. The same assessment is given to students in every state and the framework remains the same. So we can use these scores to compare states to each other and over time.

The 2024 results indicate that 4 in 10 Missouri 4th graders scored below the Basic level on the assessment. What does that mean? According to a researcher from the University of Virginia, “students performing below NAEP Basic level have less vocabulary knowledge and less world knowledge, which would limit their inferencing and comprehension capability.” Another researcher describes it thusly: “Below Basic on the NAEP means that a student is performing below the minimum expected level of academic achievement for their grade, indicating a lack of foundational skills and inability to demonstrate even basic mastery of the subject matter being assessed.”  The 42 percent of Missouri 4th graders who scored at below Basic last year are most likely now in the 5th grade trying to figure out what the heck their textbooks in any subject are trying to teach them.

Here is how the performance of Missouri 4th graders has changed over time.

This graph shows scale scores (NAEP is on a scale from 0 to 500). While Missouri was hovering just above the national average until 2017, we then began a steep slide that is barely leveling out.

But scores everywhere have declined because of COVID, right? Not so. In 2024, we outperformed just five states—Oregon, Alaska, New Mexico, Oklahoma and West Virginia. Here is the same chart for Mississippi.

Twenty six years ago, we outperformed Mississippi by 16 scale score points. Now, it’s ahead of us by seven.

What will Missouri look like in 15 years, when almost half of 25-year-olds are barely literate? We have a new governor and a new commissioner of education. Perhaps these questions should be put to them.

Pruning Missouri’s Bureaucracy: Lessons from FGA’s Report

Posted on by Patrick Tuohey

A new report from the Foundation for Government Accountability (FGA), Reducing Government Headcount: Proven Strategies for Reducing Bureaucracy While Improving Services, offers a clear blueprint for streamlining state governments while improving outcomes. Missouri could greatly benefit from these proven strategies.

The report highlights the success of reforms in states like Florida and Texas, which reduced government headcount without sacrificing services. Key recommendations include hiring freezes, targeted evaluations, and using technology to eliminate redundant processes. “Automation has allowed states to do more with less, improving services while reducing the need for additional staff,” the report notes—insights Missouri could apply to areas like its Medicaid program.

Unlike across-the-board cuts, targeted workforce evaluations allow states to focus on performance and eliminate inefficiencies. The report stresses: “By focusing on core services and shedding nonessential roles, states can strengthen public trust and improve outcomes.”

For Missouri, adopting these strategies could mean smarter spending, better services, and a government that prioritizes taxpayers over bureaucracy. This isn’t just about cutting jobs—it’s about focusing resources where they matter most.

Along with the Institute’s Missouri’s Free-Market Policy Guide and the 2025 Blueprint, the FGA’s report is a must-read for policymakers who want to ensure Missouri’s government is smarter, not just bigger.

The Surveillance Society Is Here

Posted on by David Stokes

A version of the following commentary appeared in the Columbia Missourian.

I love science-fiction movies that portray a future, usually bleak, society. Thankfully, the predictions generally have not been borne out, yet. Los Angeles in the 2020s is a much nicer place than was predicted in The Terminator and Blade Runner. I appreciate futuristic settings where the all-powerful government maintains a sense of incompetence, like in Brazil. The byzantine bureaucracy in the future’s all-powerful dictatorship may be more sinister, but I doubt they will become more capable.

There is, unfortunately, one aspect of society that classic dystopian movies and novels did get correct: the surveillance state we live in. Still, one big difference remains between the surveillance state we have today and the one predicted in 1984 and other works. Instead of it being secretly imposed on us by the national government and the military-industrial complex, we have largely brought it upon ourselves with Ring Cameras, Life 360 phone apps, etc. It’s more Truman Show or Rear Window than Blue Thunder.

Which brings us to the expansion of Flock camera systems throughout Missouri. Flock camera systems are license plate readers along roads that connect into criminal databases. They alert police when a car involved in a crime is located. Columbia is just the latest city to contract with the company to install such a system throughout the city. The city council approved the plan in 2024, and they are currently being installed. These Flock plate readers are becoming ubiquitous in towns, counties, and subdivisions. Supporters, including the Columbia police department, claim the cameras will both help solve and deter crimes. Opponents are concerned about privacy violations and potential abuses.

As an opponent of these cameras, I will readily admit the claims about crime are true (although perhaps overstated) and that some good comes from these cameras. I am glad the murderer of the CEO in New York City was caught using the power of the vast surveillance system (much of it on private property) in Manhattan. I am also happy that the cameras can help solve many, lesser crimes.

I rarely read about supporters of the cameras acknowledging their opponent’s concerns, however. Even with the safeguards from abuse that Flock and local police have put in place, including a limited time that it maintains the data and a focus on the plate rather than the driver, these systems undoubtedly will be abused by some. For example, a police chief in Kansas used the system to stalk a former girlfriend.

Just as concerning is the troubling idea that your car is being tracked incessantly as you simply travel around. I am aware there is no “legal” right to privacy in public settings. That doesn’t make this kind of tracking right, though, and being concerned about such systems doesn’t make you a conspiracy theorist.

More legally secure but even more morally troubling is the embracing of Flock systems by private neighborhoods. If there is anything more terrifying than giving your local busybody homeowner’s association head some sophisticated tracking equipment, I have yet to see it. Imagine Tom Cruise in Minority Report, but this time it’s a Karen who’s angry about a high school party. Just because you don’t have a right to privacy when driving in someone else’s subdivision does not justify that subdivision tracking your comings and goings along (usually) public streets.

Nobody, including me, wants local government to be a partisan debating society where every decision is put through a philosophical prism. However, I wish that more of the part-time local officials around the state would have some type of larger political philosophy instead of just doing whatever the city manager or police chief recommends. These license plate readers and similar systems may be legal, but that doesn’t mean they are right, and the speed at which the entire system is expanding around Missouri is frightening.

Caged birds are safe but hardly free. Politicians at every level need to push back against the expansion of the surveillance state. The pursuit of happiness includes the ability to exist without being tracked. At this point, we may get to 1984 yet. The best we can hope for is that it is more like Idiocracy than Soylent Green.

Eternal Vigilance in the Fight for Educational Freedom

Posted on by James V. Shuls

It has been said that the price of liberty is eternal vigilance. I was reminded of this as I watched Bill Mattox, senior director at The James Madison Institute, address a public school board in Florida. In Missouri, many of us look to Florida as a model for school choice. It seems Florida has accomplished what we could only dream about.

After Mattox made some initial remarks about the benefits of school choice, he was then peppered with questions from school board members and a superintendent who appeared fundamentally opposed to school choice. Even in a place that seems to have achieved great success in advancing school choice, foes of educational freedom will not go gentle into that good night.

This exchange serves as a reminder: the fight for school choice is never truly over. Even when significant progress is made, opposition persists. Opponents may be fewer in number, but they remain steadfast in their efforts to slow or reverse the momentum. Their resistance, often cloaked in concern for “public schools” or “equity,” is a testament to the very reason school choice exists: the one-size-fits-all model does not work for every child.

In Missouri, we’ve seen promising developments, like the expansion of the MOScholars program. But as Florida demonstrates, no amount of legislative success guarantees a permanent victory. Achieving reform is just the first step. Protecting those reforms requires sustained effort and ongoing engagement with policymakers, educators, and the public. If we want to ensure every child has access to an education that fits their needs, we must remain vigilant, steadfast, and ready to defend the principles of freedom and choice at every turn.

Eternal vigilance, it seems, is not just the price of liberty but also the cost of ensuring that every child’s potential is realized.

Support Us

The work of the Show-Me Institute would not be possible without the generous support of people who are inspired by the vision of liberty and free enterprise. We hope you will join our efforts and become a Show-Me Institute sponsor.

Donate
Man on Horse Charging