Clayton Smoking Ban

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

I read this article about the proposed smoking ban in Clayton with dismay. I know, lots of places have smoking bans, and it’s no surprise that Clayton residents want to follow the trend. I take issue with the reasons they give in support of the ban, like this one:

Among the other speakers was Siobhan Jones, a senior at Clayton High School. Jones said that students learn about the health hazards of smoking in school.

“But then we go to the restaurants in Clayton and we are bombarded with secondhand smoke.” she said. She urged the board to “reinforce what we learn in school.”

So, don’t go to those restaurants! This reasoning — that if you learned something is unhealthy in school, then the city needs to “reinforce” what you learned — boggles the mind. It’s also antithetical to the idea of education. Why study health in school, if the government will make all your health decisions for you?

The student has information about the health risks of smoke, but she chooses to go into a smoke-filled restaurant anyway. She wants Clayton to impose a ban so she can enjoy restaurants without facing a choice, and possibly making the less healthy choice. This reluctance to face the consequences of choices is indicative of a worldview that will stop at nothing in requesting government control, and that’s why I find it scary.

Sarah to Arne: Let Parents Choose

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

I’ve received a request to blog about a Chicago Tribune article, “Arne to Illinois: Shape Up,” specifically this quote from Arne Duncan:

“In too many places, including Illinois, we are lying to children now. [When] we tell a child they are meeting the state standards, the logical implication is that child’s on track to be successful. In too many places, including Illinois, if you are meeting state standards you are barely qualified to graduate from high school and you are totally unqualified to go to a university and graduate,” he said.

I agree that the standards are low and don’t reflect what students need to know for college or life. Many parents are happy when their children do fine on state tests, not realizing that in a few years, their children will be competing with people from China, Singapore, Sweden, and other countries with more rigorous school systems. Another drawback is that school use the low standards as an excuse, saying they can’t teach anything more advanced because they have to prepare students for the (easy) state tests.

I disagree with Duncan’s proposed solution. He wants the federal government to tell the states what to do — imposing his favorite ideas, like a longer school year, with threats like this:

“Illinois has a chance to compete for hundreds of millions of dollars. I would love to see Illinois compete,” Duncan said. “But Illinois has to change its behavior.”

Rather than bringing in the federal government to pick winners, mediocre public schools should get out of the way and let parents act as consumers. Parents with the opportunity have been choosing schools with longer school years, like KIPP schools, long before Duncan decided to impose that reform from above.

You can read my thoughts on Duncan’s charter school remarks here.

Feel free to make more blogging requests in the comments, or to email me with requests at [email protected].

The Locavores on the Bus

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

Public schools spend a lot of money and face little competition — a rent-seeker’s dream. So, it’s no surprise that the locavores are turning to schools to advance their agenda. The Post-Dispatch reports on schools and local food. Although the article opens with news from the Forsyth School, which is a small private school, it goes on to explain that many large, public districts are attracted to the same idea.

Locavores want schools to give preference to local farmers when purchasing food, even if the farmers charge more than distant suppliers. The 2008 federal Farm Bill allows it, the 2009 economic stimulus pours money into it, and a bill in the Missouri General Assembly would encourage it.

The locavores are acting in the name of “sustainability”:

“Sustainability is at the forefront,” said Kiersten Firquain, owner of Bistro Kids.

It beats me why anyone would think this practice is sustainable. Restricting yourself to food grown in a narrow region puts you at risk of starvation in the event of crop failure. How can a practice be sustainable if it will collapse at the first poor harvest? The locavores can’t even put their money where their mouths are for one year straight, because no food is grown in Missouri’s climate for a significant chunk of the year — during which season children are in school.

Food protectionism doesn’t help food consumers, but it does help the local farmers, who stand to earn a nice profit for doing their job less efficiently than farmers who are far away.

Educational Progress, or Lack Thereof

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

Andrew Coulson of Cato responds to the latest National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) data here. The picture is bleak. Students’ skills haven’t changed much since testing began 30-something years ago, but the United States has spent more and more money only to get those same results.

Coulson is absolutely correct about this:

Anyone who points to the slightly higher scores in the early grades as cause for celebration is missing the point.

Nobody hires a fourth-grader. Gains in elementary school achievement are worth something only if they can be sustained until students graduate.

Public Service Academy Proposal Is Still Stupidest Idea I Have Ever Heard

Posted on by David Stokes

The most appallingly horrible proposal in recent history might be coming to Missouri, which makes it even worse. The Kansas City Star has the details on how supporters of a national public service academy are considering Kansas City as a location. Sarah touched on this a few months ago, and I am still mortified by the thought.

It is difficult for me to comprehend how some people think it is a good idea to take some of our best and brightest, and convince them to dedicate their lives to the government. How is this for a frightening statement from a Missouri official? 

Robert Stein, Missouri’s commissioner of higher education, said public service is the lifeblood of our country, but there is no institution dedicated to developing public-service leaders.

“We need to explore how to establish a public service academy that will prompt a cadre of new leaders into government at local, state, national and even global levels,” Stein said.

I have news for Mr. Stein: Working as a bureaucrat for the government is not the lifeblood of our country. Things like liberty, freedom, individualism, entrepreneurship — these are the lifeblood of our country. Making sure that someone who wants to be a hair braider has the proper license is hardly at the same level. Nothing will get us out of this recession like convincing an entire generation that the smart move is to get a cushy job with the government, you know, with nice benefits and a feeling of fulfillment that you are not harming others by engaging in capitalism.

Look, I worked for St. Louis County for six years. There is a level of government service that has to be performed by someone. But we need our leaders to come from society and have a broad range of experiences. That is how you gain wisdom and judgment. Trying to form a culture of insular government workers who never leave government service, and who at the same time attempt to be our permanent leaders, should terrify anyone who believes in individual liberty. It only takes a short tenure in the government’s employ before too many people start to believe that the government knows best, rather than free people or markets.

Post-Katrina Education

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

Bob Compton at Two Million Minutes is blogging about education in New Orleans. Like Compton, I’m impressed by New Orleans’ commitment to rebuild its school system and bring in charter schools. On the other hand, I find it disconcerting that nothing less than a natural disaster will instigate reform.

Compton lists three key components to success in New Orleans. I don’t get this one:

implement a rigorous instructional system that is high standard and can be followed to teach effectively even by the weakest teacher

What is an “instructional system”? Is that new jargon for “curriculum”? Weak teachers should be taught to improve, or be fired. You can’t wait and hope that some other factor will make up for weak teaching, because teaching determines the classroom experience.

I’m all for the other two items — namely, certifying talented teachers “regardless of where they come from” (hear, hear!), and spending enough time on crucial subjects. However, I think we should bear in mind that the relative importance of academic disciplines is subjective. Reading and arithmetic would require the most class time in an elementary school serving disadvantaged students, while music might be an essential course in a high school for the arts. Parental choice is a good way to sort out those priorities — a lesson that New Orleans has taken to heart, given that half of the schools in the Recovery District are charters, and they’re aiming for 80 percent.

Green Jobs

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

There are two sides to every story. Here’s what Kit Bond says about government incentives for green jobs:

“It sounds really neat to think we’re going to have wind-powered jobs, except I don’t see cars going down the road with propellers on them.”

Bond argues that incentives for these jobs entail a lot of waste. The government provides a huge incentive, and the resulting jobs are few and far between. I’m inclined to agree with him. It’s nothing personal against the environment or job creation. When the state subsidizes any job, you can bet that it doesn’t make sense economically. Private businesses would step up to the plate if it did, without having to be coaxed by incentives.

Bracken Hendricks of the Center for American Progress, who is apparently an expert in PR, puts a positive spin on inefficiency:

“He made it sound like federally funded purchase of jobs when what we’re talking about is smart incentives and public investment in new infrastructure,” Hendricks said.

Supply and Demand in Education

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

Edspresso links to this American Thinker essay about the causes of student achievement. The author, Robert Weissberg, contends that choice reforms like charter schools or tuition tax credits will not solve America’s education problems. When parents want their children to succeed academically, they take advantage of the vast market supplying books and tutoring, many of which products and services are reasonably priced. So, Weissberg says, if parents and students don’t seek out academic help after school, they’re unmotivated and no improvements in supply will help them.

It’s true that the education market isn’t limited to schools. But Weissberg’s reasoning contains a fundamental flaw: He does not acknowledge that information is costly. Wealthy, educated parents are more likely to provide their children with books and tutoring because they know about those resources and how their children will benefit. An illiterate parent won’t be able to read advertisements for tutoring, and is probably surrounded by other people who don’t hire tutors. Even when that parent finds out about a free after-school tutoring program, he may not have enough information to judge how tutoring will improve his child’s chances in life.

The illiterate parent is an extreme example. However, the same idea applies to parents with a little more education and wealth. Parents give their kids the educational opportunities they know about and can afford. Many parents think that education just means “school,” so they look to charter schools but not extra books or tutoring. (One of the goals of parental choice advocates should be to give parents access to information about different kinds of education, beyond the in-school variety.)

Weissberg is right that we shouldn’t count on the government to fix education or improve achievement. His error lies in assuming that the current market provides a free flow of information to parents.

Two Excellent Essays About Immigration

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

The first is by David Nicklaus. He responds to the argument that immigrants take Americans’ jobs with this reasoning:

In an area where the overall population is declining or stagnant, this argument loses its potency. Without an adequate supply of labor, employers would be under pressure to move out of the region. Or, in many cases, the jobs wouldn’t get created in the first place.

Nicklaus concludes that immigrants to the Midwest are doing low-skilled work that wouldn’t get done otherwise because midwesterners are leaving the area.

Nicklaus’ points are relevant to Missouri, but immigration in general isn’t just about low-skilled labor. Will Wilkinson discusses immigration’s role in Toronto’s economic and cultural development:

Multicultural Toronto and cities like it prove that the institutions of liberal modernity are robust. Life within them is so good that people the world over flock to them. And newcomers do not take these institutions for granted. They have a stake in seeing them last. They can and do make them stronger.

Restricting immigration is just like restricting trade in food, electronics, or any other commodity. In fact, it can actually be worse than some of those forms of protectionism, because people are an extremely valuable resource.

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