Be sure to check out David Stokes’ interview in the Riverfront Times on licensing of professionals. I find it very informative and interesting. David has long been a proponent for deregulation of the licensing process for many occupations, because it is costly and prevents competition. He laid out the primary aspects of his position in his Dec. 4 case study for the Show-Me Institute, and there advocated a procedural review on the subject. Check it out.
The State’s Blind Pension Fund
The Springfield News-Leader and the AP have a story about a recent lawsuit by a group of blind citizens who claim the state has been underpaying them from the state’s blind pension fund. They won, but my purpose here is not to debate the lawsuit. Rather, it’s to ask whether you, gentle readers, knew that we had a blind pension fund.
I did, of course — but, then again, I am about to publish a study that actually mentions it, albeit briefly. It is funded by Missouri’s only statewide property tax, and because this is not general revenue, it’s not under the control of elected officials. It constitutes a very small part of your real and personal property tax bills each year, and — thanks to the article — you all know exactly what it goes toward: The blind people of Missouri who are unemployed and receive no other aid get $609 per month from the fund.
I have to wonder what the future holds for this fund. Total counts for the blind are rising, even as rates of childhood blindness are falling. This is because people are living longer, and are therefore more apt to go blind late in life. But blindness rates among the general population seem to be dropping, based on my very brief research.
With the elderly population being recipients of Social Security and Medicare, I wonder whether we will see a substantial drop in the number of people using the state’s Blind Pension fund during the coming decades. And, if so, would — and should — that lead to large increases in per-person coverage, or cuts to the tax? The relevant tax is currently very small, set at 3 cents per $100 of assessed valuation. By my math, that equals $10.40 a year for a house worth $200,000. No sense in cutting that tax, although it is certainly more valuable in a myriad of ways to support the wonderful groups that work for the blind in their efforts to find employment, rather than just saying, “We have a fund,” and being done with it.
Even I am not mean enough to call for cuts in aid to the blind, although I admit I thought the SNL sketch was funny — so I guess I am sort of a bastard.
And the Tables Get Turned, as We Link to Combest (Via Combest, of Course)
Well, well, well, look who hit the bigtime with his own entry over at KY3 — and on inauguration day, no less! But why couldn’t everyone’s favorite web guru e-mail them a photo? Of course, they’ll put any jerk with some drunken opinions to spout off up on the web over at political notebook. …
(Link via Combest.)
Great Minds Think Alike
I didn’t see this when I wrote about gas taxes last week: Gary Becker and Richard Posner both oppose an increase. They make some good arguments against raising taxes during a recession — in their opinion, a depression — but I’m disappointed that they don’t address the proposal to offset the increase with rebates.
Controversy Over Charter Schools
The New York Times published two articles about charter schools in the past few days: the first, a profile of a school already in operation in Minnesota, and the second, a report on a proposal for a new school in New York. The school in Minnesota emphasizes East African culture; the school in New York would specialize in Hebrew language. What they have in common is that both are generating controversy.
Critics of these and other charter schools assume that public schools should be a “melting pot” where minorities abandon their unique languages and cultures and adopt American culture. Here’s a representative quote from the first article:
“One of the primary reasons that American society supports public schools is to give everyone a solid civic education,” said Diane Ravitch, an education historian, “the sort of education that comes from learning together with others from different backgrounds.”
And here’s the answer the article gives to that lofty ideal:
But Dr. Suárez-Orozco says the reality is that most new immigrants become isolated in public schools, and that large numbers of them become alienated over time and fail to graduate.
I think there’s value in specialized cultural charter schools for academic reasons, in addition to the possible sociological benefits. How many high schoolers sit through a few hours of French a week, only to graduate with little knowledge of the language? They might have done better had they started in an earlier grade at an immersion charter school like this one in Kansas City. College students pay thousands of dollars to study abroad and learn about foreign cultures during a short period of time. They could have easily absorbed the same information while attending a culture-specific charter school.
We hear few criticisms of hour-long language classes or limited cultural education programs. But when a school spends every morning teaching a foreign language or culture — i.e., enough time to teach it successfully — then the outcry begins. If students learn too much about some individual subject, they’re not blending in with their peers who study it in less depth.
Students who are interested in math and science shouldn’t have to abandon those interests and assimilate in a school specializing in performing arts — or in a “regular” school, for that matter. And the same goes for students who want to learn foreign languages.
Talking About Transportation on KOPN in Columbia
Back on Dec. 30, I appeared on KOPN radio in Columbia to discuss tolls, public-private partnerships, and more on News at Five with Steve Spellman. We discussed the recent study written by Dr. Ken Small for the Show-Me Institute, as well as my prior study dealing with these topics. Anyway, the archived audio (currently the top one listed) is now available online, if any of you would enjoy a listen. I appreciated the opportunity to be on Steve’s show, and highly recommend listening in regularly if you are in the Mid-Mo. area on Tuesdays, when he hosts it.
A Scheme to Improve Public Service
Reading Dave’s exellent post, and his mention of a hysterical article about government workers, brought to mind this hysterical article about government workers. A man named Chris Myers Asch is trying to start a public university that would devote itself exclusively to training future government workers. The problem with the public sector, according to Asch, is not that it’s composed of unwieldy bureaucracies that crush innovation. Rather, the problem is that the smartest undergraduates don’t aim to join those bureaucracies. (Hmmm, I wonder why?)
It’s interesting to see all the alternatives to the university that are suggested by the article, but overlooked by Asch. For example, a quote from one academic quoted suggests offering scholarships for students who plan to go into public service. They could take a scholarship and choose from the dozens of public and private schools of public service that are already out there. No way, says Asch. That’s not prestigious (read: centralized) enough.
The article notes that Asch worked for Teach for America early in his career. Teach for America has achieved considerable success. Why couldn’t we start a similar program for other government jobs? Recent college graduates could spend a year or two working for different federal agencies, polishing their resumes and bringing new talent into government. We don’t require all the Teach for America teachers to attend one particular public university, and we shouldn’t encourage other public servants to do that either.
Putting all the future government workers in one place may sound convenient, but there are many advantages to a system of dispersed, competing schools and private-sector involvement — as Asch should know. After all, he went to Duke.
The Rich Get Richer Share of the Tax Burden
Thanks to our former intern Calvin Harris for pointing out this great Freakonomics blog post. Excluding federal taxes, the income tax base here in Missouri is a great deal flatter, unless you happen to live in St. Louis or Kansas City. Thankfully, there are currently some exciting tax breaks for working Missourians on the horizon that you may want to track with Policy Pulse.
Advance Your Career While Advancing Liberty
There’s a fantastic offer on the table for anyone interested in promoting the cause of free markets and individual liberty — the Charles G. Koch Summer Fellow Program.
Included in the offer:
- $1,500 stipend
- Housing allowance, up to $2,000
- An eight-week internship at the Show-Me Institute
- Seminars on policy analysis and classical liberal/libertarian thought
- Career workshops on writing, public speaking, and media relations
- Travel reimbursement to the D.C. seminars and your internship (low-cost, discount airfare)
There’s no drawback to applying, but there is a deadline. I strongly encourage all who meet the eligibility requirements (undergraduates, graduate students, and recent graduates between the ages of 18 and 30) to apply before January 31. Don’t forget to mention your interest in the Show-Me Institute on your application, and good luck!
