6 thoughts on “Stuff to Read”

1. “eliminate verifiable facts and data from policy decisions”

   Well we can have facts get in the way of profits and fear! As usual the GOP will do whatever it takes to suppress any sort of reasonable science when it comes to climate and guns, they have lots of billionaire donors paying them to do so. Meanwhile our crack main stream media is too busy covering “the Donald” to actually report anything of substance. I know they (msm) get lots of money from the American Petroleum Institute to not report on climate change, not sure why they don’t report in depth on gun violence maybe they are afraid of getting shot?

2. “The more I learn about this stuff, the more I’m persuaded charter schools are a five-alarm scam.”

   Better late than never…

3. Our daughter attended a K-8 charter school. It was a good choice; enthusiastic teachers, lots of parental involvement, high academic standards.
   So not all charter schools are scams… but your mileage may vary.

4. So not all charter schools are scams.

   If you’re not getting the full picture you really can’t know if you’re being scammed. Last year my wife got an Iphone and as part of her purchase the salesman told her for just $1.00 she could have this nice Andriod tablet. But what she didn’t realize is that the purchase of that $1.00 tablet came with a hidden cost of a contact agreement and the cost of a seperate connection( phone number) for $18.00 a month plus federal taxes.
   The phone company provided a good product and good service, but what they didn’t provide was the true cost of what they were providing. She wasn’t cheated…she was scammed.
   The same principle can be applied to Charter schools. If the true costs are hidden behind unaccountability to the taxpayer the probability of a scam exists even if the quality of service they provide is good.

5. I saw one bit that explained everything I needed to know about charter schools.

   In a state, the single biggest line item is for education. It’s not the majority, but it’s the biggest chunk of cash flow every year. That means that there’s plenty of room for someone to try to get a chunk of it, but the only way to get a big chunk is to provide educational services. Voila! Charter schools!

   Now, I won’t deny that some charter schools are probably run by good people who care about education. I’d bet that the first ones were, and I’m not saying those days are over.

   But once you have money managers thinking “hey, that’s a big blob of cash, and we could help ourselves to a share of it!” well, they’ll start thinking just like “k-6 educations” are “widgets” and look at supply chains and labor costs and look for “efficiencies” to wring out of the system. “Look at this! If a teacher works for 5 years, they get *five* raises, plus *cost of living*! But there are always some eager new teachers willing to work for entry level wages…”.

6. What a classic of the genre that Politico piece is. Maha’s description of it is “Republicans are doing everything they can to eliminate verifiable facts and data from policy decisions.” And that’s an accurate description of what’s actually happening.

   But that’s why neither she nor I will ever write for Politico.

   Here’s every incidence of “Republican,” “GOP” or “Conservative” in the story:

   It’s also a rare case where the White House and the Republican Congress have found common ground, at least rhetorically. The House has already passed a bipartisan bill from Representative Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) to establish a commission charged with finding ways to use evidence and evaluation to improve public policy. Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) called the Ryan-Murray bill an example of “the type of common sense reforms that defy partisan rankling.” President Barack Obama included the Ryan-Murray proposal in his most recent budget, and the bill awaits consideration on the Senate floor.

   Meanwhile, the Obama administration has been implementing evidence-based initiatives of its own. Its push for more data-driven policymaking has drawn positive attention from Republicans such as Ron Haskins, a former staffer for the House Ways and Means Committee and the George W. Bush White House …

   Republican committee leaders in the House and Senate might be skeptical of CMMI, but the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that CMMI initiatives will reduce federal health care spending by a total of $38 billion from 2016 to 2025—more than three times the $11 billion that CMMI will spend over that period.

   TODAY’S CONGRESSIONAL LEADERS did not always oppose evidence-based policymaking. In 2002, Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) was the chairman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, and a leader in creating an agency called the Institute of Education Sciences. …

   To be clear, there are still conservatives outside of Congress who support funding programs that gather evidence to improve public policy. …

   As Rep. Ryan said when he and Sen. Murray introduced their legislation to establish a commission on evidence-based policymaking, “If we want to make government more effective, we need to know what works.”

   It’s stunning to me that this was written by someone from the Center for American Progress, which I generally think of as an intelligent outlet. I suspect it went through some Politico editing process, because every instance of mallet-headed opposition to using facts (with the exception of the third example above) is attributed to “Congress” or “House and Senate committees.”

   Because everybody knows the first step toward fixing a problem is making sure no one can figure out who or what caused it.

Comments are closed.