PSA: School Choice For Special Needs Students

We interrupt our (ir)regularly scheduled blog post for a brief public service announcement: October is Disability History and Awareness Month. We can all agree that students with special needs require special care. Too often, schools are unable to meet the needs of students and their families. This has historically been an issue in Saint Louis, where city employees have been required to live in the city and the schools have had a poor track record. It is also an issue in many rural communities, where families feel under-served. Many states are realizing the best way to improve services and increase parental satisfaction is to provide families with options.

Currently, seven states have a voucher or tax-credit program which provides scholarships for students with disabilities to attend the private school of their choice. The largest, Florida’s McKay program, provides scholarships to more than 20,000 students. A 2006 study of McKay participants indicated participating parents were significantly more satisfied with their child’s school than were parents with a special needs child in a traditional public school. In fact, approximately 90 percent of participating parents indicated they were satisfied, compared to only 71 percent in the comparison group.

Unfortunately, most families in Missouri with special needs children have relatively few options when it comes to their child’s education. In Saint Louis County, families may be able to send their special needs child to the Special School District of St. Louis County, and in other areas, schools may participate in a co-op. These schools may improve service for some; but families with children who need special services are still at the mercy of the provider. If their needs are not being met, they can labor to improve the conditions at the school, but they may have nowhere else to turn if the circumstances do not improve.

Scholarship programs for students with special needs allow families to seek out the best options for their children, allowing them to find the school that can best meet their child’s unique needs. So for Disability History and Awareness Month, let’s raise awareness about the importance of providing educational options for deserving Missouri families.

Moving Companies, Start Your Engines!

Missouri gets a high five from me today. (Or maybe a pound. That seems to be the cool thing these days.) Over the weekend, I read in Reason magazine about the repeal of an oppressive licensing law for home moving companies in Missouri.

Before the law was repealed, any potential new moving company had to submit an application to the state government to start the company. Existing moving companies then had the opportunity to say, “No thanks, we don’t want any more competition. You can’t start your business here. Sorry I am not sorry!”

Essentially, existing home moving companies were protected against fair competition from outsiders. By restricting competition, companies had more control to set prices for their services. They unfairly cast off competition that would allow Missourians to have more choices. And, entrepreneurs were excluded from making a living in their preferred occupation.

Unfortunately, this piece of legislation did not pass the first time around. Show-Me Institute Policy Analyst David Stokes wrote in 2011 about Missouri reducing home mover licensing requirements. However, the governor vetoed that particular bill in 2011.

This time around, it looks like there is real change for the home mover business. Markets and customers can now make the decision of who will provide services. The government may think it is doing a good service by imposing certain restrictions, but occupational licensing often results in harmful effects to citizens and the economy.

The Loopy Rationale For A Loop Trolley

If you want to travel from the Loop to Forest Park in Saint Louis, there is no shortage of options: You can walk, bike, drive, take the bus, or ride the Metrolink. As if that were not enough, government planners, who are more than happy to spend your tax money for services you never even thought you needed, have dreamt up yet another alternative.

The Federal Transit Administration recently approved a $25 million grant to develop a trolley system running from the Missouri History Museum in Forest Park to the University City Library on Delmar, a distance of 2.2 miles. The total construction cost will reach close to $45 million — almost $20 million per mile of track. Private donations will pay for just a small portion (less than 12 percent) of this exorbitant cost; taxpayers will finance most of the project’s construction and operational costs. Local sales taxes, federal grants, and rider fares will pay for the trolley. However, fares will only cover 30 percent of annual costs. A meager 6 percent will come from advertising and sponsorship from private funds, with sales taxes funding 64 percent.

What is wrong with simply expanding bus service, which could be done at a tiny fraction of the cost? The government estimated rubber tire trolley (buses disguised as trolleys) capital costs to be $4.5 million, about 10 percent of the cost to build a fixed track trolley. Expanding bus service, without purchasing new buses that look like trolleys, would cost even less to start up and maintain.

Believe it or not, a 2011 environmental assessment explained that a fixed track system was chosen not just in spite of, but because of, the high cost, which supposedly proves the government’s commitment to revitalizing the area. According to the report that the Federal Transit Administration and the East-West Gateway Council of Governments prepared, a rail system “cannot be removed without substantial expense and time,” whereas rubber tire options “can be cancelled or rerouted with little expense or effort.” By this logic, the planners of the system are bound to create a white elephant — defined as a burdensome possession whose cost is out of proportion to its usefulness or worth.

There is no evidence to suggest that building a streetcar along Delmar will result in an economic windfall to the area. The plan’s proponents have not presented any kind of cost-benefit analysis to the public.

Proponents of the Loop Trolley like to throw around the term “economic development” as if it is an automatic result of spending lots of money. They assume that the creation of a streetcar will magically revitalize the less desirable areas of the neighborhood between the Loop and Forest Park. If that is the case, then why is it so difficult to obtain private financing for this system? Many of the trolley’s supporters are Loop business owners. If they believe in the project so strongly, why don’t they fund it? Instead, government is using money that could otherwise be spent on education or public safety — or remain in taxpayers’ pockets.

Supporters of the Loop Trolley may point to other streetcar projects, such as the one in Portland, Ore., as purported evidence that the Trolley will generate millions of dollars of economic development. What they do not mention, however, is the hundreds of millions of dollars of infrastructure subsidies, tax breaks, and other incentives Portland gave to developers to entice them to build in the streetcar corridor. Former Portland Transportation Commissioner Charlie Hales even admitted that rail transit alone will not stimulate development along transit corridors.

Saint Louis does not need another white elephant conjured up through the misdirection of taxpayer money.

Kacie Galbraith is a research assistant at the Show-Me Institute, which promotes market solutions for Missouri public policy.

Watch Live Tonight: John C. Goodman and Curing the Healthcare Crisis

Click below for live video of the Show-Me Institute’s Speaker Series on Economic Policy, which will begin at 6:00 p.m. CDT. Tonight’s speaker is John C. Goodman, a Research Fellow at the Independent Institute and the President and Kellye Wright Fellow in health care at the National Center for Policy Analysis. He is the author of Priceless: Curing the Healthcare Crisis.

Video streaming by Ustream

Yes, Missouri Taxpayers Will Bail Out Public Pensions

Missouri made small changes in 2010 to new state employee pension plans in an attempt to lower costs. But small changes are not enough to avoid a pension crisis.

Last week, the board of the Missouri State Employees Retirement System approved a 20 percent increase (from $274 million to $330 million) in pension costs to the state. This increase will go into effect next year. Missouri will either have to cut funding in other areas to fit this into the budget, or increase taxes.

Tax money and investment income provide a majority of the state pension system’s funding. Forecasted investment growth rates have been too high, especially during the recent economic downturn. This means that there have been unrealistic high expectations of the amount of investment income the pension plans would receive. Now, taxpayers are stuck with the bill to make up for lower than anticipated investment income.

The $330 million cost to Missouri is a clear sign that further reform to the state pension system is needed.

Wow: Missouri Accounts For Nearly One-In-Seven Historic Preservation Tax Credit Projects

So say stats from the National Park Service that were delivered to the reconstituted Missouri Tax Credit Review Commission last week. We have talked about the largesse of state historic preservation credits many, many times. These are incentives that have often gone to projects of highly questionable public benefit, like private homes and at least one country club. And while many of the buildings hardly fit the definition of “historic,” taxpayer-subsidized spending on these projects has truly been monumental.

Figures compiled by the agency show Missouri had the greatest number of completed projects that were certified for tax breaks during the 2011 fiscal year. The state’s 99 historic renovation projects comprised nearly 14 percent of the entire total for the nation.

Park Service figures show Missouri’s historic renovation projects cost nearly $331 million in fiscal 2011 — second only behind $365 million of costs in Illinois.

Doing the math, about one-in-seven preservation projects in the country that use these incentives are in the Show-Me State. Are one-in-seven “historic buildings” in Missouri? Seems more likely that it is a special interest handout. These credits need to be reformed, and soon. It is absurd that they have not been reformed.

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