Spending on Second Life

Bill Schrier comments on Missouri’s Second Life presence. He thinks spending time on Second Life is a waste of taxpayers’ money. Even though Second Life activities don’t cost much in terms of dollars, they’re a drain on state employees’ time.

Schrier has an interesting idea about the potential benefits of Second Life for consumers. If people buy things on Second Life instead of in the real world, that could reduce conspicuous consumption and free up resources for more important uses.

I’m not sure I agree that Second Life spending is a substitute for real-life spending. Many companies are on Second Life, presumably because they believe it helps their real sales. Trying out a product on Second Life might lead people to buy it when they’re offline. (Uh oh, advertising. Don’t tell Consumers International.)

But if Schrier is right about that, then Second Life activity by Missouri state employees is better than I originally thought. I’ll be happy if Missouri spends on Second Life for a fraction of the cost, and takes it easy in the real world.

A Problem We Don’t Have in Missouri

I often complain that traditional public school systems assign students to schools based on where they live. Disadvantaged students, who can’t afford to move to other districts or pay for private schooling, are forced into schools that have no competition. There’s another downside of the system, which won’t inspire much sympathy, but which shows that it’s failing people across the board: Wealthy families in high-density neighborhoods can be shut out of their local schools. (You don’t see that in Missouri, but it happens in Manhattan.)

This model of matching kids with schools works poorly. Some schools are operating under capacity, and districts have to go to a lot of time and trouble to consolidate — and risk alienating parents along the way. Others, like the Manhattan schools mentioned in the article, can’t accommodate all the children in their zones.

Severing the tie between residence and school would allow greater efficiency, and it would also reduce parents’ stress from trying to get into the “right” neighborhood near the “right” school.

I Love the Mountains, I Love the Rolling Hills

Thank you, Combest, for linking to this fantastic op-ed by Katy Steinmetz about the Missouri Scholars Academy. Steinmetz argues that the state should cut funds to the camp, and she responds to several criticisms of the cuts. I want to just copy and paste the whole thing here because it’s all worth reading, but I have to make a choice about which part to quote, so I’ll show you what she says about the Scholars Academy’s social benefits:

The academy certainly did provide tear-inspiring social acceptance when I was there, but it is not the state’s responsibility to pay for creating that environment. Nerdy outcasts should by all means huddle together and support one another in the summer months, but they should pay for that privilege – just as young Christians and overweight children and aspiring astronauts do at their respective camps.

She also discusses alternative sources of funding for the camp, which could allow the good times to continue without more appropriations.

It’s clear from the op-ed that Steinmetz’s lighthearted tone didn’t come about by accident. It was the result of careful cultivation; when she was a student at the Scholars Academy, she majored in humor.

The Right to Never Hear About Junk Food, So You Won’t Be Tempted to Eat It

The Post-Dispatch‘s Savvy Consumer blog linked to this website, which would be amusing if some people weren’t so serious about it. It’s Consumers International, dedicated to protecting some vague “rights” that consumers supposedly have to safety, information, etc. World Consumer Rights Day took place on March 15. I totally forgot to have a party celebrating that, but maybe I’ll put it on my calendar for next year.

If I were starting a consumer rights organization, there are several issues I would want to focus on. For example, parents’ ability to choose their child’s school. Or patients’ ability to choose medical treatments without being subjected to state rationing of services. Or consumers’ ability to buy products from outside their city or region.

Needless to say, those are not the applications of consumer rights that Consumers International cares about. To find out what they do care about, I looked around their website and related blogs. Marketing junk food to children is a major concern. Take a look at this post about Lucky Charms. It describes a complicated legal dispute with General Mills over advertising, a taste of which (pun intended) can be seen in these two paragraphs:

The General Mills Canada Corporation created an actual advertising system to promote its sweet cereals, Lucky Charms, among children. The website for which the complaint was made was advertised on the product packaging (which is in itself a form of advertising, but is subject to an exemption according to the regulations for implementation of the Consumer Protection Act (CPA)).

The many appeals of the website particularly speak to the child’s appetites, in order to capture his interest. A wealth of games and animations featuring Lucky the Leprechaun were available on the site. With their fantastic and magical nature, these “webisodes” were clearly designed and aimed at an audience younger than 13, something that is defended in Section 248 of the CPA. As well, advertising messages automatically appeared on the screen: “Lucky Charms Chocolate cereals are now available in Canada”.

First, they point out that product packaging is a form of advertising. Well, yes it is, but what’s wrong with it? If a child sees an ad on a package, that’s because his or her parents already bought the product. Kids don’t wander around grocery stores reading the backs of random cereals.

The package advertised a website for kids. To me, that sounds like a good thing. Many parents are worried about their kids seeing adult content on the web, or coming across information they’re not ready for. If a cereal package directs them to a site that’s just fun and games for kids their age, it’s doing parents a service. Advertising children’s cereals and toys is the impetus for developing kid-friendly websites. Few organizations would develop elaborate Internet content for kids with no hope of remuneration.

And because kids usually aren’t able to do a lot of shopping independently of their parents, advertising to them can’t have much effect, anyway. It’s not like kids can get a job, drive to the store, and buy whatever cereal they want. I think the “advertising” is more about responding to parents‘ wants than trying to convince kids to buy something. Parents like to see their kids engaged in the world around them. They’d prefer to buy a cereal with cute mascots on the front of the box, puzzles on the back of the box, and online games.

Of course, my arguments wouldn’t reassure Consumers International. They’re unhappy with anybody encountering advertising for junk food, not just children. They do have an alternative in mind for you to eat: street food. Here’s a description of how street food is served, from the “What is street food?” page:

It is served with the minimum amount of fuss in individual portions dished into take-away containers.

These containers come in a variety of materials such as disposable plastic, paper and Styrofoam plates, bowls, cups and utensils.

Is that environmentally sustainable consumption?

Nonpartisan Elections a Bad Idea for Franklin County

When it comes to elections, everyone wants the same thing: high voter turn-out and a well-informed electorate. Unfortunately, those two goals often work against each other. Voters search for shorthand cues — such as political party identification, incumbency, gender, and ethnicity — that might indicate which choice would best fit their own political inclinations and voting preferences. The charter proposal currently before Franklin County voters would designate the newly created offices of county council and county executive as nonpartisan positions, meaning that candidates would not run as Democrats or Republicans. Party affiliation is an efficient mechanism by which candidates reveal information about themselves to voters. Party labels aid typical voters in deciding which candidate better fits their preferences. Although the proposed charter includes many positive aspects, civic leaders need to ensure that voters can still make use of shorthand cues to increase their ability to cast informed votes, rather than taking those cues away.

Historically, supporters of nonpartisan elections touted them as a means of fighting corruption by urban political machines — a situation that does not apply to Franklin County. The next common argument is that local issues do not fall along partisan lines, as is the case in Jefferson City or Washington, D.C., so partisan elections would be irrelevant. While that may be generally true for smaller towns and suburbs, it is not always the case for counties — particularly larger ones, like Franklin. Counties are not cities, and should not be governed as such. Counties contain competing interests, and must deal with issues, such as zoning and taxation levels, that sometimes fall along traditional partisan lines. In those cases, party identification can guide voters to make a more informed choice.

The Kansas City City Council is the most prominent nonpartisan elected body in Missouri, yet the substantial majority of its members are quite partisan by any practical definition. Almost half of them have previously served as state representatives, and many of the others are currently active in partisan organizations. A former Kansas City mayor just ran for Congress in a partisan race. Nonpartisan elections have not taken party activism out of Kansas City politics.

A final common argument in favor of nonpartisan elections is not so much an argument as it is a hope. Some seem to believe that eliminating party identification will lead voters to make more informed decisions because they no longer have a partisan shortcut. This is wishful thinking at best, because there is no evidence to suggest that this happens. There might be an extremely small number of people for whom the lack of a party label acts as an incentive for them to research their decisions more carefully, but the vast majority of voters will simply look for other cues to decide their votes — particularly incumbency, but also gender, family name, and party recommendations.

This last item — party recommendations — is key. The most informed voters are also, almost always, the most political voters. It is only common sense that these two qualities coincide. Even without partisan elections for Franklin County’s new offices, factions will still develop — and the existing party structure will still support one faction over another. For instance, from 1913 to 1973, Minnesota’s legislative elections were nonpartisan. During that period, the legislature quickly developed conservative and liberal caucuses, political parties still endorsed particular candidates, and researchers at MIT and Princeton found, “A large segment of the electorate consistently voted for one party across offices even in the absence of party labels.”

In “Teams Without Uniforms: The Nonpartisan Ballot in State and Local Elections,” a study for Political Research Quarterly, three political scientists concluded that nonpartisan elections led to decreased voter turnout and increased the advantages of incumbency. They also failed to find evidence that nonpartisan elections lead to a more informed electorate, stating, “there is little reason to believe that nonpartisanship promotes an effective policy linkage between citizens and their elected leaders.”

The decision to mandate nonpartisan elections as part of Franklin County’s charter proposal is troubling. Voters there deserve the same candidate information they receive for other elections. Nonpartisan elections in an area as large as Franklin County will not lead voters to cast more informed ballots for county races — particularly when it comes to the county executive. Despite the many worthwhile parts of the proposed county charter, nonpartisan elections will not lead to better government in Franklin County.

David Stokes is a policy analyst for the Show-Me Institute, a Missouri-based think tank.

 

Online Mandates

Virtual schools, like the Missouri Virtual Instruction Program, give families for educational choices. I think that’s a good thing. But should online classes be mandatory? This article in School Reform News discusses Alabama’s new requirement that every student take an online course in order to graduate.

The reasoning behind this isn’t clear. The people quoted in the article talk about equalizing education across the state and giving everyone opportunities to take specialized courses. Those are great reasons to offer online courses — but not to force anyone to participate who doesn’t want to.

It seems like some reformers see promising new opportunities and reflexively conclude that everyone has to take advantage of them, or else. It’s this pattern that led to my concern about imitating Asia, which I briefly mentioned in this post. I’m happy about virtual schools, bilingual programs, and other reforms and innovations. Let’s keep them voluntary, and let people choose them if they wish.

A Silly Analogy

Edspresso links to this column by Danny Westneat, about merit pay for teachers. Westneat’s concern that teachers may favor short-term test results over long-term learning is a legitimate one. (For example, teachers would have a greater incentive to help their students cheat on assessments.) But the parallel he draws between merit pay for teachers and bonuses for CEOs had me rolling my eyes:

For Wall Street bankers, the gauge was profits or stock prices. For classroom teachers, it’s usually student test scores […]

[O]n Wall Street it was a disaster.

Nobody suggests giving a teacher a million dollars if students’ test scores rise. The proposals I’ve seen involved bonuses of at most a few thousand dollars — a small fraction of a teacher’s salary. This isn’t like CEO bonuses; it’s more like giving tips or commissions in addition to salary, a type of pay structure that exists in many different professions without wreaking havoc.

Westneat asks why we have to “incentivize” the teaching profession. My answer is that we already do. It’s just that the current incentives don’t all contribute to student learning. The typical public school salary schedule rewards graduate degrees and seniority, not good teaching. So a dynamic young teacher earns less than an aging mediocre one. That’s probably responsible in part for the high attrition rate among young teachers. And a teacher who gets a master’s degree in theory receives a bigger reward than one who gains skills from practical workshops.

In fact, any professional faces a multitude of incentives on the job, not all of which even have to do with money. Instituting merit pay wouldn’t bring in an incentive where there used to be none. It would, however, slightly change the incentives that teachers face, and perhaps lead to better outcomes in the classroom.

Ambulances Are a Very Big Deal

Kansas City is considering changing the way it operates its ambulances. Currently, they are managed by an independent entity, MAST, and some in city government would like to bring the operation in-house. I don’t know whether or not this is a good idea. Generally, closer cooperation between a fire department and emergency medical techs is a good thing, and if combining them into one agency achieves that, then go for it. However, the Star article does not make it clear whether or not the two entities would be merged, or whether the ambulances would remain separate from the fire department — in which case, I would be less supportive. (Note: Since first writing this, I have found this PrimeBuzz link that says it would be a merger.)

The real point I want to share is how commonly this issue is debated. New York City debated it, and I believe moved forward with it in 1995. Boston is considering doing the same right now. Each of these articles, about New York and Boston, cites St. Louis — which merged its ambulance service into the fire department in 1997. This turned out to be very successful, from everything I can tell. This same issue has been similarly debated in St. Charles County.

Not surprisingly, these disputes often involve a union element, with representatives of both firemen and EMTs trying to preserve their respective turf. This is where strong leadership is needed, to overcome the natural bureaucratic opposition to such changes. I wish Kansas City’s Mayor Mark Funkhouser good luck in that regard — although I should be clear that I have no idea whether the current head of MAST should stay or go.

Post-Dispatch Editorial About Judges Needs a Tweak

Yesterday, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch ran an editorial against making changes to Missouri’s judicial selection system, suitably enough known as the “Missouri Plan.” I agree with much of this very good editorial (and we always appreciate being cited by others), but I did want to clarify a few things about Show-Me Institute study by Professors Joshua Hall and Russell Sobel that the editorial refers to, along with our other writings on this subject.

I support the Missouri Plan, but many of the changes to the plan debated by the editorial board are very close to what I called for in a commentary piece I wrote almost two years ago. Altering the terms of the commission members, reducing (but by no means eliminating) the influence of attorneys, and adding legislative confirmation of commissioners to the selection process would all be well within the framework that Hall and Sobel examined in their Show-Me Institute study. They were careful to note at the end of their study that they did not consider smaller reforms that would simply change the structure of the commission, though they warned that going too far in such changes would negate the point of the commission. States that use the Missouri Plan but add legislative confirmation to the process score just as well in the rankings Hall and Sobel considered as our current system does.

Our editor, Eric Dixon, wrote a useful piece about ways to interpret Hall and Sobel’s study. We appreciate the Post‘s editorial board using our work, but the study that the Show-Me Institute released does not suggest that all of the recent suggestions for altering the Missouri Plan are poor policy.

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