Two months have now passed since our lawsuit was filed, and so far, the case is proceeding relatively slowly, which we expected. Unsurprisingly, the Office of Administration didn’t immediately surrender and decide to just hand over the documents it’s been giving the AFSCME, so we are still anticipating the case will carry on well into next year. In the interest of transparency, I would have hoped that the OA would have simply provided these documents to us without further delay—transparency for AFSCME should also mean transparency for the rest of the public. But unfortunately, it may take a judge to affirm this notion.

A little more surprising is the fact that AFSCME itself has decided to try and intervene in the case, arguing it has a stake in the resolution of this case. That’s surprising because our litigation doesn’t address AFSCME’s actions, but rather the actions of the government. Time will tell what becomes of this intervention, if anything.

We’ll continue to keep you posted on this important case.

The post Show-Me Institute v. Office of Administration: A Brief Update appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

But while population loss in roughly half of Missouri’s counties sounds terrible, there’s more going on here.

A great deal has been written about the growth of big cities across the country, but news outlets are slowly picking up on a trend that shows small and middle-sized cities gaining steam with young people. Think cities like Waco, TX and Knoxville, TN as opposed to Austin, TX and Nashville, TN—cities that aren’t necessarily state population hubs but that play an important role in their regional economies.

In fact, it seems that young people’s attraction to big cities is often overstated. Research increasingly suggests they are equally drawn to the less-costly option of smaller cities and suburban areas. Census Bureau data show that suburban growth is outpacing large city growth, with large city growth tapering off.

How is this playing out in Missouri? While most rural counties and Saint Louis City saw population declines, many medium-sized cities—Springfield, Columbia, and Lee’s Summit to name a few—have seen population increases according to the Census Bureau. Since Missouri’s total population only grew by a small percent, most of this population change is attributed to intrastate migration.

So while it is true that rural populations are dipping, it’s at least in part because of regional population consolidation in cities not far from where residents formerly lived.

And when you think about it, this migration trend makes a lot of sense. Small and medium-sized cities provide many employment, entrepreneurial, and social opportunities that may not always be available in rural areas, and these cities are often more affordable and community centered than big cities. While this trend isn’t great for rural counties—that is, the political subdivisions themselves—it is good for the people moving toward better economic and social prospects. As farms in rural areas become more productive and require fewer laborers, having access to city resources and opportunities will be all the more important for these residents.

Unfortunately, Missouri has struggled with overall population growth in recent years. During that same July 2017 to July 2018 time period mentioned above, Missouri was 29^th in the nation in population growth, with a paltry 0.3% increase. This rate is consistent with the low population growth rates that we’ve seen for years. So, while this trend of intrastate migration is positive, we can’t forget that Missouri still struggles to attract new residents.

The post Many Missourians Are Moving . . . To Missouri appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Last week, the Jefferson City News Tribune reported on Missouri’s recently released ACT scores. The 2014–2015 school year was the first year in which every 11th-grader in Missouri was required to take the test, which in theory predicts how well a student will do in college. The Tribune reported that Missouri increased its average score from 21.6 to 21.7, and that Missouri students outscored national averages in every subject area.

But before we pop the champagne bottle, let’s talk about the ACT.

The ACT is an imperfect tool for comparing students from different states. The test is more popular in some states than in others, so participation rates vary. Only thirteen states had 100 percent participation, and 59 percent of students participated nationally. Where participation is voluntary, we might expect scores to be higher on average, as only students interested in taking the test actually take it.

The participation rate in Massachusetts, for example, was 28 percent. The small number of Massachusetts students who took the ACT in 2015 scored a 24.4 on average. Is that because Massachusetts has a superior education system, or because the composition of students is different? New Hampshire, Maine, New York, and Connecticut were also among the top performing states on this year’s ACT, but participation in those states ranged from only 10 to 28 percent.

Scores on the ACT should be paired with other data to determine how well schools, districts, and states are preparing students for college. Let’s take a look at another measure—remediation rates. The map below shows the percentage of students by county who enrolled in remedial coursework in college (coursework they already should have completed in high school) in 2014. Red indicates higher percentages and green indicates lower percentages of enrollment in remedial courses. In the lower half of the state, there is a whole lot of red—63.3 percent of graduates from Ash Grove High School in Ash Grove, Missouri, for example, enrolled in remedial coursework in 2014.

Getting students to college is important, but it’s only half the battle. Missouri should not lose sight of the goal of true college readiness. It is great to see that as more students are taking the test, scores are going up. But with remediation rates like those in Missouri, it’s clear that much work remains to be done.

The post Let’s Talk about the ACT appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The number of Medicaid cases, including youth in the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), hit a high point in May with more than 918,000 cases. Since January, the cases have increased by more than 55,000 due to various factors, including the implementation of a new enrollment system and policies in the Affordable Care Act, said Brian Kinkade, director of the department of social services.

Cases hit a low in May of last year with approximately 819,000 enrolled, which Kinkade credited to the Affordable Care Act taking effect in January. They have since steadily increased, but with a more noticeable jump this year.

Missouri’s population is just over 6 million, so having over 900,000 enrollees means that about one in seven Missourians is now in the state's Medicaid program. Part of the year-over-year growth here is attributable to the department fixing a host of technology problems, about which I've written before. 

But much of the topline enrollment growth is connected to the "woodwork effect" of the ACA. The woodwork effect describes what happens when individuals currently eligible for Medicaid but not enrolled become enrolled, thanks to other enrollment drives pushed under the law. Enrollees "come out of the woodwork" and join the program who, but for the ACA, would not have. In fact, much of the cost of the ACA comes from this woodwork population, who on a per-beneficiary basis are considerably more expensive to states than the expanded population. Policymakers should keep in mind that ACA supporters often omit those expanded costs when talking about the law, perhaps because it dispels the illusion of "savings" they regularly tout.

The latest numbers from the Medicaid program serve as yet another reminder that a Medicaid expansion under the ACA is precisely the wrong course for Missourians and for Missouri's budget. Our state leaders must remember that growing welfare rolls are not a mark of success, but of policy failure.

The post Department Testimony Confirms: One-in-Seven Missourians on Medicaid appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

So I can understand why Jefferson City officials are planning a fancy new conference center. But as we have said in the past, the government is not the best suited to plan development. There are two proposals for the project; both companies have told Jeff City officials that the government’s request for a facility with 30,000 square feet of exhibit space and an accompanying 200-room hotel is not realistic in this market.

The city has promised $9 million in lodging tax revenue to support construction, and is discussing the details of an operating subsidy.

The News Tribune editorial board has fears, writing, “Worst-case scenarios revolve around a money-losing conference center that must be vacated or infused with a perpetual subsidy of city tax dollars.” This is a real fear.

A Brookings Institution study found that the convention marketplace in the U.S. has been declining for quite some time. Yet, localities have continued to compete with each other for convention business by investing in new construction and expanding existing facilities. The study notes that many conference centers, including those in Saint Louis and Washington, D.C., have operated at a loss.

Why are Jefferson City officials so eager to invest in something for which they have not demonstrated a need? If developers who stand to gain from subsidies are telling the government that their plans will not be profitable  — the government should listen.

The post Conventional Fears appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Recent  news of the city of Columbia offering special incentives to American Airlines, but not to Delta, prompted Phil Garcia to write about the consequences of rent seeking (and even compared the situation to his children wanting more allowance). Garcia commented how rent seeking hurts competition and raises taxpayer burdens. Check out his excellent letter to the editor in the Jefferson City News Tribune — Your Opinion: Airport ‘rent-seeking’.

Also read our posts explaining why Columbia made a poor decision, and a related op-ed about how Columbia intends to pay for an airport expansion.

The post Privilege Seeking appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

So, I readily agree that Missouri should have a shorter session, because I basically agree with P.J. O’Rourke that preventing a politician from governing is like preventing a pit bull from eating your child. Anything that limits the ability of government to infringe on our freedoms is good by me. You can find a lot more on this subject in my paper about government in Missouri from the perspective of public choice economics.

I do wish someone would have called us to testify about this proposal, though. From the article:

No one spoke for or against the plan during Monday’s hearing.

Nobody ever said public choice economics was exciting. …

The post Fine Idea for Shorter Legislative Sessions in Missouri appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The Jefferson City News-Tribune reports that another stipulation requires the businesses to aesthetically blend in with their surroundings.

That last requirement is the least reasonable. No store can look just like the establishments surrounding it while simultaneously advertising itself to customers. And the burden of this regulation will only increase over time, for if neighboring businesses come and go, a tattoo shop will have to continually redesign itself to blend in with the changing scene.

I can’t imagine what tattoo shops will look like under this ordinance. Will a tattoo parlor next to an office building have to masquerade as corporate headquarters?

The new policy doesn’t satisfy all tattoo shop critics; some would prefer that tattoo shops stayed out of Jefferson City. One council member explains why he opposed ending the ban:

“Many times these things are done randomly without much forethought and individuals do regret this,” said Pope.

I would expect people who share this opinion to call for waiting periods before anyone can get a tattoo, rather than bans. Completely banning tattoo parlors prevents people who do exercise foresight from getting tattoos — and why should they be punished for someone else’s lack of judgment? This council member should at least be happy with the new policy’s regulation of operating hours, because whoever decides to get a tattoo after 8 p.m. will have all night to reconsider.

The post Jefferson City Wants Tattoo Parlors to Be Like Chameleons appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The editorial concludes:

The unseemly competition for federal dollars will continue until state and local governments join forces on the principled high ground and refuse to play anymore.

Race to the Top is similar to this year’s Census marketing campaign. The end goal of each is for the federal government to distribute money to the states. The difference is that the Constitution mandates a census, whereas there’s no constitutional justification for a race to the top — or for any other federal interference in education.

If Race to the Top is a show, I’d like Missouri to call a friend; we should call Texas and learn from a state that won’t run for the tax dollars.

The post Dancing with the Feds appeared first on Show-Me Institute.