A Columbia University study suggested that with a fleet of just 9,000 autonomous cars, Uber could replace every taxi cab in New York City—passengers would wait an average of 36 seconds for a ride that costs about $0.50 per mile. Such convenience and low cost will make car ownership inconceivable, and autonomous, on-demand taxis—the “transportation cloud”—will quickly become dominant form of transportation—displacing far more than just car ownership, it will take the majority of users away from public transportation as well. With their $41 billion valuation, replacing all 171,000 taxis in the United States is well within the realm of feasibility—at a cost of $25,000 per car, the rollout would cost a mere $4.3 billion.

Back in November 2013, we observed largely the same thing without the benefit of the Columbia study:

In contrast to light rail, the rapidly progressing leaps in driverless car and cycling technology are allowing people more freedom and choices in how they get from point A to B. Indeed, the future of transportation is in flexibility, not inflexibility. Google driverless cars allow for cheap and easy transit while respecting individual freedom. In several places, state legislatures have altered their traffic laws to allow for such cars.

Sadly, Kansas City is still bent on building what the people do not want, 19th-century fixed rail. Meanwhile, it fights innovation from Uber and Lyft. Our conclusion then remains true today:

The fixed rail they will be installing downtown offers none of that flexibility or popular appeal. Rails do not take passengers where they want to go; rail takes people where city planners want or need them to go (not to mention a car ride to the stations in most cases).

To add insult to injury, the rail system that is being built likely will be abandoned by the hip urbanite core that it is meant to attract as soon as something sexier comes along … like a Google car.

The post Transit of the Future; You Read It Here First appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Without addressing the propriety of civil forfeiture laws, a department does not inspire confidence when it claims it needs more taxpayer dollars although it spends the proceeds of assets seized from residents on “toys,” as though they were “pennies from heaven.” Columbia residents might consider whether the funds the department currently receives are prudently managed before more is allocated.

The post The Columbia Police Department and Pennies from Heaven appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Nutritional Services is working with vendors to provide food and educational opportunities from local food producers and farmers to reduce the impact CPS has on the environment and to educate students about where their food comes from.

The assertion that local food is superior for environmental reasons comes up often in local food debates. To understand why districts should not conflate local food with environmentally friendly food, I recommend reading Caitlin Hartsell’s excellent post about why growing food closer to consumers is not always better.

In addition to in his claim that local food is better for the environment, the candidate says that purchasing food locally will teach students where their food comes from. I don’t know how he expects the food to do that. From the students’ point of view, food from Missouri looks the same as food from Illinois or food from Indiana. Of course, teachers could point out to students where the food originated from, and they could conduct lessons on where the food was cultivated and harvested — but they could do that just as well if the food came from a different state. In fact, if the place where cafeteria food is grown is to become a subject of study, it might be better to buy food from a distance. That way, students can learn about a place with which they wouldn’t otherwise become familiar, instead of focusing their local area, which they already know something about from experience.

The post Columbia Board of Education Candidates Discuss Cafeteria Food appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Missouri capitol building in Jefferson City.

COLUMBIA — On Monday night, Sen. Kurt Schaefer (R-Columbia) told the Columbia Board of Education that more cuts to the state budget seemed certain, and that the steep decline in state tax revenues would likely affect funding for public schools.

“I don’t know the public really has a full understanding of how difficult of a budget situation we’re in,” he said.

According to Schaefer, who is vice chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, general tax revenues were down 6.9 percent for fiscal year 2009 and are down 10.8 percent for the current fiscal year. The percentage declines translate to about a $500 million revenue loss in fiscal year 2009, and at least another $500 million by the end of this fiscal year.

The state last saw such a decline during fiscal years 2002 and 2003, when the state’s general revenue fell $463 million for both years and then rebounded, Schaefer said.

Schaefer said that the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) has this year requested $105 million in order to fully fund the amount of money that the state promises each year to local school districts.

Jan Mees, board president, asked whether there would be any more state withholdings from the budget.

There likely would be, Schaefer said. He said that Gov. Jay Nixon’s cuts seemed to be based on the expectation of a 4-percent decrease in revenues for the year, but pointed out that revenues will likely fall short even of that decline. The state seems poised for a 7-percent decrease for the current fiscal year, he said.

“What can we as a school board do other than to continue to lobby our legislators?” asked district Chief Financial Officer Linda Quinley.

So far, Schaefer said, the best testimony given during the senate appropriations hearings came from experts who knew how money could be spent the most effectively. Also, he said, school districts should show legislators how they have already cut their budgets.

Schaefer said that for him personally, K–12 education and higher education are priorities when drafting the state’s budget.

But, he said, “I don’t think that anybody should be under the illusion that these cuts aren’t going to be painful, because I think that they’re going to be very painful for people. Our job in the General Assembly is to make sure that the cuts that are going to be made are the least negative and the least harmful cuts that can be made.”

Andrew Guevara is a student at the University of Missouri–Columbia.

The post School Districts Likely to See State Funding Cut appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Pat Fowler said she was frustrated not every student in the school district watched President Barack Obama’s address to students last Tuesday. She asked the board to pass a policy that lets parents opt out of watching a presidential address instead of opting in to view the president speak.

That’s a troubling phenomenon in uniform public schools — people fighting for the schools to impose their preferred policies on everyone else, rather than just for their own children to be able to study what parents want them to to study.

The post Opt-in or Opt-out? appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The post Columbia’s History With Eminent Domain Abuse appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The “Missouri Plan” amended the state Constitution such that judicial nominations are selected — at least in part — through an independent nominating counsel (generally comprising state American Bar Association-appointed lawyers) instead of by popular election. Today, 26 states have adopted some form of the “Missouri Plan” for their judicial appointments.

The legal benefits of the “Missouri Plan” are debatable. Many studies have examined the impact of such plans on business-friendly legislation (the argument being that judicial nominations appointed by ABA members will be less friendly to issues that might limit the market for lawyers). In fact, in an upcoming policy report, the Show-Me Institute will examine the Missouri Plan in detail. (Stay tuned for the excitement!)

The Federalist Society’s research highlights at least one negative aspect, however. To date, 45 states have addressed education adequacy litigation. According to data gathered by Columbia University, about two-thirds of adequacy decisions in Missouri Plan states strike down the legislatures’ funding statutes. This means that courts have effectively commandeered the power of the purse — something clearly within the proper domain of the legislatures.

In addition, in a joint study by the Institute for Justice and the American Legislative Exchange Council, analysts found that school voucher systems are constitutional in 77 percent of states with popularly elected judiciaries, versus 50 percent in Missouri Plan states.

So I guess this was a long way of me saying that there is evidence that courts are friendlier to the school choice movement in states where judges are elected by the people themselves.

The post The Missouri Plan appeared first on Show-Me Institute.