More (and more, and more) money

The Oklahoman's Michael McNutt and Julie Bisbee reported yesterday that in his trip to Oklahoma this week, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush "said he was skeptical of State Question 744, a measure on the Nov. 2 ballot that, if approved, would require Oklahoma to increase per-pupil spending to that of surrounding states." They quote Gov. Bush as saying:

"The question ought to be, is more money spent per student in an unreformed system going to yield rising student achievement? There's absolutely no evidence that more money per student yields higher student achievement."

Where in the world did Gov. Bush get a crazy idea like that? 

Democrat economist: Increase Oklahoma's per-pupil spending by ... enacting a voucher system

For two years now I've been writing and speaking about the HOPE initiative (later christened State Question 744), and I've been telling any legislator who will listen that one way to cope with HOPE would be to enact school choice. Simply put: if 744 passes, legislators are going to be faced with enormous budget pressures; one way to ease the strain would be to get as many students as possible off the appropriators' dime and onto the parents' dime. As I observed last summer,

"Whoever digs a pit will fall into it," the proverb says, "and he who rolls a stone will have it roll back on him." Wouldn't it be ironic if the teacher union's irresponsible ploy forced legislators to save money via school choice?

Comes now Mickey Hepner with a terrific new post on his economics blog, "OKonomics." Dr. Hepner is an economics professor at the University of Central Oklahoma and, significantly, a member of the executive committee of the board of directors for the Oklahoma Academy, a venerable think tank founded in 1967. A self-described "centrist Democrat," Dr. Hepner was (is?) an enthusiastic supporter of Barack Obama. In short, he is not a member of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy (at least he's never at the meetings).

The debate over State Question 744 is all about per-pupil funding, Dr. Hepner wrote yesterday, and there's a way "to raise per-pupil funding without impacting other government programs or raising taxes -- by instituting a school voucher program."

In 2008-2009 Oklahoma education funding averaged $8,006 per student. This figure though, is based only on the number of students enrolled in public schools. If Oklahoma was able to shift more students from public to private schools, state funding would be spread out over fewer students, thereby raising the per-pupil average. Of course, the only way to shift large numbers of students from public to private schools is to help pay for private school tuition ... a cost that offsets some of the gains. However, if structured correctly, a voucher system could still generate cost-savings for the state, allowing it to raise per-pupil spending.

In short, "the numbers don't lie: if education proponents really want to increase per-pupil spending, they should embrace a school voucher program."

Yes and amen. My only suggestion would be to phrase it this way: "they should embrace a school voucher or tax credit program." There's nothing wrong with vouchers, of course, but until Oklahoma can solve its Blaine Amendment problem (preferably through repeal), tax credits are going to be a much cleaner way to go. In any case, Dr. Hepner's blog post is excellent and I encourage you to read the whole thing.

'Honey, when did the feds take over the kids' school?'

Neal McCluskey on the biggest federal takeover you've never heard of.

‘Schools are still performing at some level below where they should’

Good editorial today in The Oklahoman.

Tulsa's oldest Catholic school

... is upgrading and growing.

Now's a good time to repeat what I've been saying for months

First the teacher unions backed a radical, irresponsible spender.

Now they're backing a radical, irresponsible spending scheme.

A school choice governor ...

... is coming to Pennsylvania.

How about Oklahoma?

Let's spend more on schools -- even though it won't help

In the current issue of The Weekly Standard, Andrew Ferguson reflects on some poll results that are "more bewildering than they let on—not merely contradictory but nonsensical." He concludes:

A paradoxical people, these Americans: eager to have an incompetent government that they don’t trust do more of the things that they don’t want it to do.  

So true, and strangely reminiscent of some recent SoonerPoll results here in Oklahoma. Nearly two-thirds of Oklahomans (65 percent) want to raise public school spending to the regional average, yet a nearly identical number (64 percent) don't think more money will cause students to learn more.

What to make of these sorts of contradictions? Ferguson, hearkening back to Seymour Martin Lipset, calls them "inevitable artifacts of polling in a country where people are expected to have considered opinions even when they don't."

Edujobs folly

Well, Nancy Pelosi has summoned the House back to Washington today to pass the $26 billion edujobs bill. Mike Antonucci illustrates what a bad idea this is:

The secret to better public schools (and balanced state budgets)?

Strong private schools.

Treating a pension deficit disorder

[This Marlin Oil advertorial appears in the August 4 edition of The City Sentinel.]

In stories for CapitolBeatOK.com, senior editor Patrick B. McGuigan of The City Sentinel has detailed devastating national investigations finding that Oklahoma’s Teacher Retirement System (TRS) is horribly underfunded. For Oklahoma taxpayers, a financial crisis of unimaginable proportions lies waiting in the wings, unless the economy grows robustly and/or benefits are cut.

The Pew Center for the States found Oklahoma was among the five worst of the 50 states in terms of unfunded mandates in its system. In all, American state governments faced what Pew researchers called a "trillion dollar gap" between promised retirement benefits to public employees and the resources to pay for them.

In a later story, McGuigan detailed research from the Manhattan Institute and the Foundation for Educational Choice finding that nationally the gap in government retirement plans is “worse than you think.” A third investigation, from the Institute for Truth in Accounting, estimated that unfunded mandates could cost each Oklahoma family $14,600.  

In 2007, state Treasurer Scott Meacham said, "The biggest problem exists with the biggest pension fund – the Teachers’ Retirement System – where actuaries indicated that nearly three times more money than is currently received is needed to properly fund the system."

But somebody apparently hasn’t read any of this. Management for TRS this year redecorated offices in the Capitol complex in Oklahoma City, at a cost of about $115,000.

In San Francisco, an initiative effort aimed at addressing that city’s own nightmarish pension shortfall has emerged from a perhaps unexpected direction. A local public defender joined forces with a retired Silicon Valley entrepreneur to gather signatures needed that could force a popular vote on pension reform. Those pushing reform are “progressive” (i.e. liberal) but in this case they are fiscally quite conservative.

The San Francisco initiative proposal would limit future benefits and put new burdens on public employees themselves to help fund their own retirement plans. Public employee labor unions are opposing the effort, but at least a solution is being put on the table.

It’s not often that most Oklahomans would point to San Francisco as a possible source of reform ideas, but that’s the case here. It is past time to take seriously what researchers at the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs call Oklahoma’s “Pension Deficit Disorder.”