“The Clothes Make the Man”

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

"… Naked people have little or no influence on society." — Mark Twain

I don’t know much about the pros and cons of police using golf carts, but I was surprised by this article about what police are using them for in Pine Lawn. Giving people tickets because their pants are too low? And parents could end up in jail for three months if their 16-year-old-or-younger kids wear the offending style?

My first reaction to this was that maybe they have nothing else to worry about in Pine Lawn. The article mentions gunshots and a chase, though, so that can’t be right. And violent crime must scare businesses away at least as much as low pants. (The ostensible reason for the pants ordinance is to bring businesses to the city.)

If Pine Lawn wants to attract more economic activity, it should crack down on real crimes — not fashion crimes.

“There Are Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics”

Posted on by Justin Hauke

The Springfield News-Leader published a letter to the editor from the Show-Me Institute this morning about payday lending.

In response to the reader comments that claim that the information in our letter was misleading, that was exactly our point. Just as it is misleading to quote payday lending rates in annualized terms (when most loans are paid off in just 14 days), so too it would be misleading to quote library late fees in annualized terms (when late fees are only $0.10 per day after 30 days).

In short, we believe that individuals — not the government — should dictate the terms at which people voluntarily choose to contract with one another.

Vice Lieutenants of the Board of Aldermen

Posted on by David Stokes

There is a very enjoyable article today in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch about a local expert on vice presidents, which is topical because Washington University will be hosting the vice presidential campaign debate later this year. I share Professor Joel Goldstein’s interest in this office, and other unusual political offices. I say "unusual" because the vice president — and, at the state level, the lieutenant governor — are the only elected offices that cross multiple branches of government. They are offices of both the executive branch in their capacity of being successor to the president or governor, representing the president or governor (in Missouri, assuming both officials are of the same party) at official events, and sitting on various boards or commissions as the representative of the executive branch.

They serve in the legislative branch in their capacity of president of the Senate at both the national and state level, at least here in Missouri (not every state does it the same way). Nowadays, the vice president or lieutenant governor only oversee the Senate on ceremonial occasions or perhaps for major votes where their tie-breaking authority might be called upon. However, it used to be common for them to do so. This even led to a lawsuit in the 1970s in Missouri when Republican Lt. Gov. Bill Phelps (who I had the pleasure of talking to just this past weekend) wanted to oversee the state Senate, and the large Democratic majority at the time did not want him involved, for obvious reasons. (The practice of vice presidents overseeing the daily operations of the Senate ended long before the 1970s.) The senators won the case, and I have no idea whether it was a good decision or a bad one, but it’s an interesting footnote for the office.

Some voters are still unaware that, unlike the president and vice president, Missouri’s lieutenant governors are not elected as part of a ticket. As such, while not common, it is also not unusual for the governor and the lieutenant governor to be of opposite parties. I like keeping the elections separate, although I would be happy to concede certain points for them to be elected on a ticket. As the 35th senator and the successor to the governor in the event of a tragedy (which happened in Missouri just a few years ago), I like that the lieutenant governor is independently elected. Voters can judge a candidate’s fitness for those capacities, and go from there.

I feel that the president of the Board of Alderman in the city of St. Louis sort of crosses branches as well. While those serving in this position primarily fall in the legislative branch, they are elected citywide and also serve in an executive sense on the Board of Estimate & Apportionment. I guess you could say that the attorney general and county prosecuting attorneys serve in both executive branch and the judicial branch, but I think they more accurately represent the executive branch (and the citizenry) before the judiciary, and are not a part of it.

Derailed

Posted on by Justin Hauke

I’ve never ridden the St. Louis/Kansas City Amtrak train, but have heard plenty of negative things about it. This year, the General Assembly approved $8 million in operational cost subsidies for the beleaguered line. And if that weren’t enough, the state is also financing a $5 million “capital improvement” appropriation for track repairs. Quite a lot for a train route with only 67 percent on-time departures/arrivals.

But, apparently, that’s not enough. Amtrak notified MoDOT today that it faces a $400,000 budget shortfall, despite a $600,000 funding increase from last year.

I know nothing about railroad operations (unless you consider reading this to be a definitive guide), but it seems to me that if Amtrak ridership is declining while the profitability of freight transport is increasing, perhaps Amtrak might consider reducing the number of daily departures (currently four, about the same as the number of Southwest Airlines flights) and devoting that track time to freight lines.

Or Missourians can continue to contribute close to $15 million in scarce transportation revenue each year to support the running of empty trains (with snack bars!).

Efficiencies of Scale in Local Government

Posted on by David Stokes

There is a very interesting post in The American Scene today about a proposal in New Jersey to mandate the consolidation of smaller towns. You can find additional commentary in The Atlantic. Please review the first graph, which shows significantly higher per-capita costs in the smallest towns, which then quickly level out as the cities get just a little bigger. I have found a very similar curve in comparisons of the spending levels in third-class Missouri counties, but that info has to wait until the release of my paper next month. (That is what is known in the biz as a "tease.")

I would never support manadatory consolidations, but there is no doubt that at the very smallest population levels, economies of scale can be achieved quickly as counties or cities grow somewhat, and also little doubt that those same economies of scale are quickly leveled off. It’s neat to see the graphs of New Jersey towns and Missouri counties look almost the same. As H.I. McDonough’s boss says to him in Raising Arizona, "It’s a crazy world."

Ed in ’08: Good Questions, Short on Answers

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

Ed in ’08 came to St. Louis this week to promote education reform. Follow the link to watch KTVI interview Adam Thibault about the campaign’s goals.

I liked the mention of merit pay and rewarding teacher quality. But the next suggestion — that we create more positions for teachers like "mentors" and "leaders" — doesn’t seem like it could transform the profession as radically as Ed in ’08 hopes. Some schools already have programs that allow teachers to mentor each other, which is nice but hardly innovative policy. This would be a good time to bring up charter schools, tuition tax credits, or another policy that would allow families to choose schools and allow schools to compete, but once again Ed in ’08 lets the opportunity slip.

Ed in ’08 in asking, "How do we improve American education?" and doing a good job of calling attention to this issue. Sadly, the conversation doesn’t go very far because the policy change it throws out for discussion are too cautious. If this were a multiple-choice test, I’d have to answer, "None of the above."

For Wall Street Journal, Lightning Strikes Twice

Posted on by Patrick Eckelkamp

There are two editorials in today’s Wall Street Journal that discuss and highlight the proper solutions (read: abolish needless government regulations) to the worsening health care situation in the United States. Both editorials are spot-on in their assessments, and should be read by all those who are looking for a solution.

The first editorial focuses on the Florida legislature’s unanimous passage of a health care reform bill during this last session. The bill was aimed at kicking the government out of our health care decisions, rather than trying to further regulate and manipulate the free market. Gov. Charlie Crist signed the bill in an effort to combat the notion that health care coverage has to be an all-or-nothing decision. Before this bill was signed, health care coverage plans were littered with state mandates and regulations that often drove up the price of the plan beyond the reach of average individuals. As the author points out, these erstwhile mandates included such "necessary" procedures as the age-old practice of acupuncture, not to mention chiropractic visits (I searched a long time for a clip from the Simpsons episode where Homer sort of becomes a chiropractor, but had no luck). All kidding aside, this is quite an accomplishment for those free-market advocates who think the government would only worsen the problem (jeez, who could think something like that!).

The second editorial also focuses on a bill that is working its way through the legislature in New Jersey (yeah, I know, New Jersey is ahead of Missouri — uh oh) that will allow residents to cross states borders to buy an affordable health care policy. By opening out-of-state markets, it allows competition to flood the New Jersey market, which can only benefit that state’s consumers. Rather than being held hostage by existing health care companies in the state that are able to coordinate and charge higher premiums, consumers will be able to select from a number of approved health care providers (don’t even get me started on what approved means, but that is a topic for a different day) throughout the United States.

Because New Jersey’s average health care costs are almost double the national average, this bill should be welcomed with open arms. Nevertheless, opponents of the bill say policy buyers will only be able to get "bare bones" coverage. That is simply not true. Even if did happen to be true, it is not like policy holders would switch to a lesser plan than they originally had; this would simply allow those who had nothing before to have something.

Let’s all hope this bill succeeds, and Missouri legislators take notice.

Alright, that is all for now. I have to get home so I can make it home for the two-hour "Lost" finale.

An Early Understanding of Economic Incentives

Posted on by Justin Hauke

A precocious high school student criticizes the accuracy of Missouri MAP test score results in today’s Springfield News-Leader, arguing that such scores are a biased metric of student performance. She explains that because MAP test scores are not perceived by students to have a direct impact on their future academic success (which seems to me to be pretty true), students have little incentive to prepare for it — in some cases, they actively strive to do poorly on purpose in order to reflect negatively on their teachers.

I have no doubt that this student is correct about MAP test student incentives. I remember my own experience with the Texas TAAS test, which I actively worked to either fail or skip and encouraged my peers to do so as well (oh, I was such a punk at age 14).

We can argue about whether standardized tests are an appropriate measure of student learning. Any performance metric will ultimately be biased, though, because learning can’t be summarized in a single number. And although I would disagree that incentives alone are responsible for low MAP test performance scores, I do wholeheartedly agree with the aforementioned student’s statement about the role of incentives in general:

At the root of this problem lies the real challenge for MAP test-takers: motivation. Students do not perform as well as they should on MAP tests because they simply do not care.

Students without incentives have little reason to care about academics in general, not just the MAP test. If a family is stuck in poverty, in a miserable school system, with little opportunity for upward mobility, then it is no surprise to find students there who find little reason to care about their academic performance.

This is one of the reasons to support school choice — to break the barrier of stagnation. If students don’t have an opportunity to learn, and are stuck in a system in which violence rather than learning is the primary concern, even the brightest and most motivated will fall behind. If offering families the opportunity to choose their school helps even one additional student break that cycle, school choice is a success. And think of the benefits to Missouri.

P.S.: By the way, according to our grade report, the author of the piece linked at the beginning of this entry goes to a school (Glendale High School) that is ranked among the top 25 percent of public schools in the state (and even higher among high schools alone).

Confluence Academy

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

The Post-Dispatch published a great article today about Confluence Academy. These successful charter schools have seen enrollment skyrocket, so that now nearly 2,300 children attend the three schools. You can see why the St. Louis Public Schools feel so threatened by charters. They’re getting really big:

Confluence is now larger than many public school districts — nearly the size of the Clayton and Affton districts.

The interesting thing about this situation is that nothing is preventing SLPS from running its own Confluence Academy. This is a good time to review Caroline Hoxby’s remarks about charter schools. She points out that charter schools are not doing anything that it’s illegal for public schools to do. Nobody ever said traditional public schools couldn’t imitate the best charters, or pioneer their own innovations. They just don’t do those things.

So if SLPS really wanted to replicate Confluence Academy’s success, they could: teach Spanish to kindergartners; spend extra time on reading; offer more opportunities to study chess, poetry, and African step-dance; and teach a different character value each month. (At Confluence, this month’s value is compassion.) But SLPS isn’t looking for innovations like these, because in the past, its students have had no other school to choose. It didn’t need to attract students and show results.

Maybe SLPS will start trying new things as it faces more competition from charters. But even if it doesn’t, at least families will have options besides SLPS.

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