Voice For Liberty

Author: Bob Weeks

  • What Is the true state of public education in Kansas?

    On a web page that is part of the National Education Association website, we can read some good news about Kansas schools. Here are some of the headlines to be found on that page:

    Math Scores Are Among the Nation’s Best
    Math Scores Are Up
    Among the Best in the Nation in Students Going on to College
    College Entrance Exams Are Among the Nation’s Best
    Among the Best Gains in the Nation in Students Going to College
    ACT Scores Are Rising
    More Students Are Taking ACTs
    Public School Students Outperform Private School Students on AP Exams
    AP Scores Are Among the Nation’s Best
    More Public Schools Offer AP Courses
    Public School Students Outperform Private School Students on AP Exams
    Among the Best in the Nation in Students Receiving a High Score on AP Calculus Exams

    You can read the entire story here: Good News about Public Schools in Kansas.

    These headlines stand in contrast to what the Kansas Supreme Court has said, and to what we were told this summer during the Kansas Legislature’s special session. We were told that Kansas schools were in grave danger, that Kansas schools were not adequately funded, and that if the legislature didn’t do its job and adequately fund schools, then Kansas schoolchildren were in danger of being outperformed by children in all other states.

    But here we have the teachers union citing much evidence that Kansas schools are among the nation’s best.

    So what is the true state of public education in Kansas? There are many studies and statistics available. Many contradict the conclusions made by others. Constituencies such as the teachers unions and the education establishment tell us they have only the welfare of the children as their concern, but many times they act otherwise. Who is qualified to decide what to do?

    The answer is simple. Ultimately, parents have the responsibility for educating their children. They are the ones in the best position to know what is best for their children. We need to empower parents to be in control of education. The way to do that is to give parents a choice as to where to send their children to school. For most people, that choice doesn’t exist in a meaningful way. School choice through vouchers can give them that choice.

    The teachers union and education establishment say that competition and school choice through vouchers will ruin public education. But if they’re doing as good a job as the headlines above indicate, they should fare well under competition.

  • How one school found a way to spell success

    In the October 14, 2005 Wall Street Journal, Daniel Henninger wrote about an elementary school in Little Rock, Arkansas that experienced a remarkable turnaround in student achievement. This poor school, where 92% of the students live at or below the poverty level, was able to increase its scores on an achievement test by 17% in one year.

    What did Meadowcliff Elementary School do? Did it build new buildings and hire new teachers to reduce class size? Did it implement new curriculum? Did the local board of education hire an extra assistant superintendent to oversee the school? Did it increase teacher pay?

    It’s the last that the school did, although not in the way the teachers unions would dictate. Instead, the school was able to implement a bonus system, whereby teachers would earn extra money based on student performance. Mr. Henninger reports the results: “Twelve teachers received performance bonuses ranging from $1,800 to $8,600. The rest of the school’s staff also shared in the bonus pool. That included the cafeteria ladies, who started eating with the students rather than in a nearby lounge, and the custodian, who the students saw taking books out of Carter’s Corner, the ‘library’ outside the principal’s office. Total cost: $134,800. The tests cost about $10,000.”

    The bonuses were funded by a private donor, which allowed the school to bypass the teachers union. The teachers union opposed the second year of the bonus program because it was to be paid from the school district’s regular budget. The union insisted that the teachers at Meadowcliff vote for a contract waiver, and 100% of the teacher voted for the waiver. The fact that the teachers union would oppose something that was demonstrably beneficial for the students gives us another clue as to the union’s true constituency.

    This experience shows that sometimes little, simple things can make a huge difference.

    More information: PEF Announces Student Achievement and Teacher Reward Project, LR elementary scores bonuses for test gains.

  • The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference

    Book Review: The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference
    Malcolm Gladwell
    Little, Brown and Company, 2000

    Writing from Lexington, Kentucky

    (I picked up the book from the library because in a hurry, I thought it might be about my ragdoll cat whose name is Tippy. But I decided to read it anyway.)

    This is an interesting book that tells us that often the way to affect change is not through heavy-handed techniques, but by paying attention to small things that can make all the difference. Mr. Gladwell tells us about the Law of the Few (connectors, mavens, and salesmen), which means that the personal characteristics of people make a big difference. The Stickiness Factor explains how small changes in the presentation or characteristics of something can make a huge difference in its effectiveness. The Power of Context tells us how seemingly small changes like the vigilant effort to remove graffiti in New York City subway cars led to a larger reduction in serious crime in the subways.

    I think this book has some good ideas and can be helpful for anyone who wants to influence others. Many interesting examples are used to illustrate the lessons of this book. Author’s website for this book.

  • How government destroys self-reliance

    Writing from Lexington, Kentucky

    There is a problem when government interferes with what people should be doing for themselves. Government can destroy the incentive to provide for yourself and your family.

    For the families of victims of the September 11, 2001 terrorists attack on New York, a board determined how much the family should receive in compensation based on a variety of factors, including the age and earning potential of the deceased. Then, the award was reduced by the amount of any life insurance the deceased had. We should ask what is the message given when government does this? What is the incentive to forgo current spending in order to buy life insurance, when the government may take the benefit that you paid for away from you? That’s exactly what happened to the people who had their own life insurance. The government took it from them, and they were worse off for having it. Conversely, for those who did not provide their own insurance, the government provided it for them, at no cost.

    For those who suffered losses due to floods from hurricane Katrina in Mississippi, that state’s attorney general is suing insurance companies to force them to pay for flood damage, even though the usual homeowner’s policy fairly shouts that flood damage isn’t covered. If Mississippi succeeds in forcing insurance companies to pay for flood damage, what message does that send to those who sought to protect and provide for themselves by paying flood insurance premiums for years? At minimum, the government ought to refund the premiums they paid, if government is to give the same benefit to those who paid no premiums.

    These two examples illustrate how, in an effort to appear compassionate and help unfortunate victims of tragedy, government destroys the incentive to provide for one’s own self and family. When government forces the same outcome for everyone, the same result for those who sacrificed and prepared and for those who didn’t, we might ask why even bother preparing?

  • How government insurance destroyed New Orleans

    Writing from Chicago, Illinois

    In the September 3, 2005 New York Times, columnist John Tierney educates us on the difference between private insurance and government insurance. Currently, the flood insurance that’s available through the federal government, because the premiums are so low, doesn’t fully reflect the costs of assuming that risk. And even as cheap as the flood insurance rates are, not many people bought it.

    What’s wrong with government insurance that’s priced too low to cover the risks it insures? First, the taxpayers as a whole have to pay to subsidize something that benefits only a few. Second, as Mr. Tierney writes, building strong levees is a long-term project that protects against something that probably won’t happen before the next election — the time horizon of most politicians. “Members of Congress will always have higher priorities than paying for levees in someone else’s state.”

    Also, government insurance isn’t subject to the discipline of having to make a profit. Private insurance companies must earn a profit over the long haul, so they will charge rates commensurate with the risk, and they will seek ways to reduce the risk. They might decline to insure property in the riskiest areas, and they will pressure governments to build and maintain the protections that, sadly, we learned failed in New Orleans when levees broke under conditions they should have survived. Private companies have the discipline to do this. Governments don’t.

    In his column, Mr. Tierney tells us the history of fire protection in America, and how private fire insurance has worked to ensure the fire safety we have today.

    Some may say that the poor of New Orleans couldn’t afford to live where they did if they had to pay flood insurance premiums that were priced properly. That’s something that government can’t cure — except that government will try by spending untold billions. But after New Orleans is rebuilt, it is likely that before too long the same situation will exist as did before Katrina. Do we really expect anything else?

  • How About Something Simple Like the Truth

    How About Something Simple Like the Truth
    Alan Cobb, Americans For Prosperity, Kansas

    I had a great time visiting 23 cities across Kansas last week to promote the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR). The number of supporters vastly outnumbered the opponents, but both sides had more folks come out than I ever imagined.

    During the tour, several things became clear. While TABOR supporters offer hope and solutions to getting out of our economic slump, opponents offer nothing but nay-saying, scare tactics and misinformation.

    In fact, the flagrantly dishonest information being spread is simply breathtaking.

    Let’s remember all the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights does is allow Kansas voters to approve tax increases and spending increases above the rate of inflation plus population growth.

    The purpose of TABOR is simple. Government should have to live within its means just as Kansas families and businesses do every day.

    Opponents cite Colorado and make claims TABOR decimates the economy with few or no facts. The truth is Colorado has one of the strongest economies in America. How in the world Kansas’ Regents head Donna Shank could say that Colorado’s economy is “running on life support” makes one wonder.

    Although Shank recently stated publicly she wanted to research the subject and ask “tough questions,” when she showed up at the American Dream Express bus stop in Liberal, she didn’t stay long enough for even an easy question. In fact, the short presentations made by myself, State Rep. Larry Powell and State Senator Tim Huelskamp didn’t elicit one question from Shank

    For those unable to ask questions during our bus tour, below are myths and facts surrounding TABOR:

    Myth: TABOR hurts the poor.Fact: Colorado’s poverty rate is lower than Kansas’
    Myth: Thousands of teachers would be eliminated.Fact: Colorado has gained more than 11,000 teachers since 1994.
    Myth: TABOR has hurt teachers in ColoradoFact: Colorado teachers are paid more than teachers in Kansas.
    Myth: TABOR has devastated higher-ed in Colorado.Fact: U.S. News ranks the University of Colorado as the 78th best university in the country and ranks K.U. 97th. Colorado State was ranked 120th and K-State wasn’t ranked.

    Kansas doesn’t have a state university among the best 120 masters-level universities in the county, and Colorado does.

    Both K.U. and K-State have higher tuition than the Univ. of Colorado.

    Myth: Colorado Gov. Owens wants to repeal TABOR.Fact: Gov. Owens has repeatedly stated he wishes Colorado’s TABOR was like Kansas’ TABOR.
    Myth: Kansas government spending as a percent of income hasn’t changed over the last 30 years.Fact: State spending as a percent of income increased almost 50% over the last 30 years.
    Myth: TABOR has devastated the Colorado economy.Fact: Prior to TABOR passing in Colorado in 1992, Kansas and Colorado’s economic growth was similar. From 1984 to 1992, Colorado ranked 43rd in median family income growth and Kansas ranked 48th. From 1992 to 2004, Kansas ranked 44th in family income growth and Colorado ranked 7th.

    In 1980, Kansas per capita income rank was 16th, Colorado was 12th. By 2004, Kansas per capita income rank was 29th, Colorado was 8th.

    From 1980 to 1992, Kansas ranked 43rd in productivity growth and Colorado ranked 26th. Colorado ranks 4th in productivity growth since 1992, Kansas ranks 37th.

    Colorado ranks 1st in concentration of technology jobs, 2nd in number of new companies per capita, and 4th in estimated long-term job growth.

    Let’s do a service to all interested in this debate and quit the ridiculous demagoguery.

    There is a reason TABOR opponents have stooped to scare tactics in defense of the old “we’ve always done it this way” mentality. Scare tactics are what you use when you don’t have the facts on your side.

  • Criticism of Bob Corkins reveals true motivations

    I have not met Bob Corkins, but I have read some of his articles. I published several on the Voice For Liberty in Wichita. He is in favor of school choice, and that is one thing that the education establishment, education bureaucrats, and teachers unions are very much opposed to. Never mind that allowing school choice could be the quickest and easiest thing we can do to improve schools in Kansas. As Harvard economist Caroline Hoxby has noted regarding school choice in Milwaukee:

    From 1998-1999 onwards, the schools that faced the most competition from the vouchers improved student achievement radically–by about 0.6 of a standard deviation each year. That is an enormous, almost unheard-of, improvement. Keep in mind the schools in question had had a long history of low achievement. Yet they were able to get their act together quickly. The most threatened schools improved the most, not only compared to other schools in Milwaukee but also compared to other schools in the state of Wisconsin that served poor, urban students. … Milwaukee shows what public school administrators can tell you: Schools can improve if they are under serious competition.

    I would like to hope that the appointment of Mr. Corkins will lead to thoughtful debate in Kansas about education instead of more self-serving pronouncements from the education establishment and teachers unions. But the shrill criticism does not give me hope.

    From Karl Peterjohn, Kansas Taxpayers Network:

    Bob Corkins is an excellent choice as the next commissioner for education in Kansas. He is one of the top experts on school finance in this state with excellent legislative contacts and he has his own children in public schools. A dirty little secret is that some of the government school officials children are attending or have attended private schools.

    The government school establishment, the left wing Kansas press, the left wing elected officials have all responded with outrage to his appointment. The vile, hateful, and wildly inaccurate statements from tax ‘n spend legislators like Sen. John Vratil, Sen. Tony Hensley, Sen. Jean Schodorf, state school board member Bill Wagnon, and editorials in newspapers like the Wichita Eagle, the Lawrence Journal World, and the rest of the left-wing press in this state demonstrate their commitment to the state school monopoly.

    The political Left in Kansas endorses big, bureaucratic government that provides a state monopoly and perpetual demands for tax dollars for the public schools. This education is often strong on indoctrination and weak on learning to read, write, and computing numbers without a calculator. Sadly, state monopoly performs poorly for many Kansas children and then their families must struggle to either fund an alternative education at home or in a non public school. Bob Corkins will be working with the majority of the Kansas state board of education to improve education in Kansas. His appointment is a breath of fresh air for Kansas education.

    The following was written by Sen. Tim Huelskamp, R-Fowler:

    Elitist Arrogance in Kansas

    This week a dear friend and colleague of mine, Mr. Bob Corkins, was selected as the new Education Commissioner of Kansas. He brings to the position a wealth of experience: a background running a small business, strong experience promoting a positive business climate in Kansas, a reputation as a leading education budget expert, his first-hand knowledge of the Legislative process for nearly a decade, his legal expertise per education lawsuits, and national exposure as a top-rate policy analyst.

    For one who is to serve as CEO of a department of 200 employees –respond to the wishes of an elected 10-member State Board of Education — watch over 300 school districts — and account for more than $4.5 billion of taxpayer dollars — Bob would seem to be a perfect match.

    But for the elitists in Kansas today — he is not qualified.

    The excuses were many — he is not a superintendent or a classroom teacher. Heck, he’s not even a curriculum specialist or a master teacher. And he’s never even been the assistant secretary to the vice-principal of finance for the instruction of the English-as-a-second-Language students. And, by goodness, the guy doesn’t even have a Ph.D. in Education — or even a Master’s.

    The education insiders have gone ballistic. One superintendent claims that Corkins doesn’t care about the children, because he doesn’t support a massive tax and spending increase (which, of course, would increase the superintendent’s personal pocketbook). You might tell Bob’s Boy Scout Troop that he doesn’t care about kids.

    One Board of Education member — the husband of Governor Sebelius’ Secretary of the Department of Revenue — fell into a fit of babbling and make a nonsensical comparison of the appointment to the FEMA response to Hurricane Katrina. And then he threw out some disparaging personal attack on the integrity and intelligence of Corkins.

    The assault by the elected elitists continued next with attacks by Senator John Vratil, the all-powerful vice-chairman of the Senate Education Committee. Vratil compared Corkins’ appointment to making Saddam Hussein president of the United States. (That is a quote!) Bob Corkins a terrorist?!?

    Of course, don’t you know, Mr. Vratil is obviously more qualified in education than Bob — for he has law degree from KU — hmm — the same school as Corkins. But don’t forget, as a trial lawyer Vratil has not only sued the state of Kansas (and lost) for more education spending — he also receives considerable income serving as counsel to various school districts. But rest assured, neither the Kansas Bar Association, nor the Kansas Commission on Judicial Qualifications has found any conflict of interest between Senator Vratil serving as counsel to certain school districts and his votes for more taxpayer dollars to these districts.

    Based on the elitist disgorging, it is abundantly clear that Bob Corkins is the perfect man for this job. We need an Education Commissioner who can work with the State Board of Education, the Legislature, the 300 elected school Boards, and the taxpayers of Kansas to develop a 21st Century Vision for education in Kansas. Instead of simply focusing on spending more money doing more of the same, it is time our government education system focused on real improvement, cost efficiency, and responsiveness to the needs of parents and students.

    I call upon Senator John Vratil to do the right thing — apologize for your outrageous remarks. How do over-the-top insults, name-calling and personal attacks do anything to help the children of Kansas?

  • Book Review: Winning The Future

    Winning The Future
    Newt Gingrich
    Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2005

    This book by former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich outlines his prescription for what America needs to do to avoid decline. The five threats Gingrich identifies are Islamic terrorism, that God will be driven from American life, that America will lose its patriotic sense of self, that America will lose its economic supremacy to China and India, and that future demands of social security and Medicare will collapse our system.

    To counter these threats, Gingrich says we need a 21st century contract with America. The contract is quoted at the end of this review, as it appears on the author’s web site newt.org/winningthefuture.

    I particularly found what Gingrich has to say about American education important. He quotes the Hart-Rudman Commission on American National Security, which in 2001 concluded that the greatest threat to America was a terrorist attack. The second greatest threat is “the failure of math and science education. In fact, in an unanimously approved provision, the Commission said that the failure of math and science education is a greater threat than any conceivable conventional war in the next quarter century.”

    Further, “For the last twenty years, we have tried to improve education while accepting the fundamental principles of a failed system guarded by education bureaucrats and teachers unions.” Also: “There has been a steady growth in the amount of money spent on red tape, bureaucracy, and supervision. We now have curriculum specialists who consult curriculum consultants who work with curriculum supervisors who manage curriculum department heads who occasionally actually meet with teachers.”

    Interestingly, Gingrich proposes paying students, starting in middle school, to learn math and science. What a refreshing idea! Instead of them learning to work at McDonald’s after school for spending money, they could earn it by taking the tough courses that so many young children seek to avoid.

    This idea, and other creative and refreshing ideas make this book worthwhile to read.

    The 21st Century Contract with America

    I

    Defend America and our allies from those who would destroy us. To achieve security, we will develop the intelligence, diplomatic, information, defense, and homeland security systems and resources for success.

    II

    Transform the Social Security system into personal savings accounts that will enable every worker to have higher retirement incomes from their own work and avoid the need for financial support from their children.

    III

    Recenter America on the Creator from Whom all our liberties come. We will insist on a judiciary that understands the centrality of God in American history and reasserts the legitimacy of recognizing the Creator in public life.

    IV

    Establish patriotic education for our children and patriotic immigration for new Americans. To achieve this,we will renew our commitment to education about American citizenship based on American history and an understanding of the Founding Fathers and the core values of American civilization.We will insist that both our children
    and immigrants learn the key values and key facts of American history as the foundation of their growth as citizens.

    V

    Meet the triple economic challenges of an explosion in scientific and technological knowledge, an increasingly competitive world market, and the rise of China and India by implementing:

    A new system of civil justice to reduce the burden of lawsuits and to incentivize young people to go into professions other than the law.
    A dramatically simplified tax code that favors savings, entrepreneurship, investment, and constant modernization of equipment and technology.
    Math and science learning equal to any in the world and educating enough young Americans to both discover the science of the future and to compete successfully in national security and the economy with other well-educated societies.
    Investing in the scientific revolutions that are going to transform our world—particularly in energy, space, and the environment.
    Transforming health care into a 21st Century Intelligent Health System that improves our health while lowering costs dramatically. In the process, American health care will become our highest value export and foreign exchange earning sector.

    VI

    Work to include every American in a system of patriotic stewardship so every person has a real opportunity to pursue happiness as their Creator endowed. Prepare for the aging of the baby boomers and their children so we can have active healthy aging with the best quality of life, the longest period of independent living, and the greatest prosperity. We will:

    Develop a system in which those who wish to stay economically active are encouraged and incentivized to do so because active people live longer and healthier, have a greater opportunity to pursue happiness, and are less of a burden on their fellow citizens;
    Develop a system of independent living and assisted living that increases the years in which people can be on their own and in most cases enables people to live their entire lives with freedom and dignity;
    Develop a new model of quality long-term care in which both the care and the quality of life are compatible with a twenty-first century American expectation of progress and innovation.
    Use the new technologies and new scientific knowledge to turn disabilities into capabilities and change government regulations and programs to help every American achieve the fullest possible ability to pursue happiness.

    VII

    Change the mindset of big government in Washington by replacing bureaucratic public administration with Entrepreneurial Public Management so government can operate with the speed, effectiveness, and efficiency of the information age.

    VIII

    Balance the federal budget and insist on a lean government, low tax, low interest rate economy to maximize growth in a competitive world.

    IX

    Insist on congressional reform to make the legislative branch responsive to the needs of the 21st century.

    X

    Ensure an election process that is honest, accountable, accurate, and free from the threat of illegal votes or subsequent litigation.

    If we insist on these goals and insist on electing leaders at all levels dedicated to these goals, we will be able to leave our children and grandchildren an America of safety, health, prosperity, and freedom that would make our parents and grandparents proud.We too will have done our duty to our country and our achievements as citizens will be worthy of the America we inherited.

  • TABORTruth.org Not Quite So

    Right away the website tabortruth.org states: “TABOR proponents are baiting citizens with the allure of tax cuts, …”

    My understanding of proposals for a TABOR in Kansas doesn’t include tax cuts, except in one case. That’s because taxing and spending will proceed in this way: First, spend up to the limit imposed by the sum of inflation plus population growth. Then, put some tax money away in the emergency and budget stabilization fund. Then — and only then — if there were excess tax revenues, they would be sent back to the taxpayer. This doesn’t sound to me like much of a tax cut.

    It is likely that politicians will vote to spend all they can under TABOR limits, so it is quite likely that Kansas spending and taxes will continue to rise. It’s just that now there is a limit on the rate of growth. In the peculiar language of Washington and Topeka, a reduction in the rate of growth is called a “cut,” so maybe in the hearts and minds of the authors of tabortruth.org, there will be “tax cuts.”