Category Archives: Uncategorized

Do needy students merit more scholarships?

Education, Politics, State government, U.S. Congress, Uncategorized

By Steve Brawner
© 2015 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

Let’s jump straight into the facts. According to a new report, “Closing the Gap,” by the Arkansas Department of Higher Education, 94 percent of Arkansas’ state-funded college scholarships are based solely on merit – ACT scores, etc. – while 6 percent also are based on need. Only two states and the District of Columbia are weighted more toward merit. The national average, on the other hand, is 75 percent need-based.

The fact that Arkansas is doing things differently than the rest of the nation should matter, considering it has the second lowest percentage of residents with a college degree. (Thank goodness for West Virginia!) About 14 percent of us have a bachelor’s degree, while 7 percent of us also have a master’s degree or higher. Another 7 percent have an associate’s degree.

The 94-6 percent ratio is the result of the growth of Academic Challenge Scholarships awards, which are largely funded through the lottery and are entirely merit based. In the past, the scholarships went to students who scored a 19 on the ACT or earned a 2.5 grade point average in high school. A law passed this year by the Legislature makes the 19 on the ACT the only requirement, which may have been a mistake because grade point average supposedly is a better predictor of college success than standardized test scores.

The problem with basing scholarships on merit alone is that it makes them harder to attain for students who grew up in tougher circumstances with fewer advantages. Those are the very students who need the money more – as long as they can put it to good use.

Let’s also be blunt about what’s really happening. People of all income levels buy lottery tickets, of course, but a certain percentage of those ticket-buyers are poor people looking for a little hope. That’s their choice, but state resources are encouraging them to “invest” in this pipe dream. Then their money pays for scholarships for bankers’ kids. I’ve got a banker friend who’s outraged by this.

The report says 25 percent of Arkansas scholarships should have a need-based component. If that’s the case, then what should those scholarships pay for?

According to the report, more than half of Arkansans – 57 percent, actually – have a high school diploma or less.

Of course, that describes a lot of smart, successful people. But moving forward, most of the good jobs of the future will require something more, though not necessarily a bachelor’s degree or even an associate’s degree. The report says that, by 2020, Arkansas needs to produce an additional 99,000 people with career and technical certificates, which often can be earned fairly quickly and at low cost to fill existing workforce needs. Arkansas actually will need 786 fewer people with master’s degrees than it has now, the report estimates.

The Academic Challenge Scholarship goes to students attending college, not earning a technical certificate, which is the better choice for many people. And it’s really targeted toward 18-year-old high school graduates, rather than adults who need to retool their skills to be more employable.

So however the state rebalances its state-funded scholarships so that they’re based more on need, it should remember that what people really need is the ability to earn a good-paying job, and preferably in the near future.

***

If you have 30 minutes when you’re washing the dishes or something, listen to Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse’s maiden speech on the U.S. Senate floor.

Sasse waited a year after being elected to make his first speech, which once was a Senate tradition. When he finally spoke, it was a bold call to action. He said the Senate is failing to address the nation’s big issues, allowing the executive branch to take too much power. Senators from opposite parties are privately friendly, even affectionate. But when the cameras roll, they talk in shallow sound bytes using politi-speech that sounds nothing like the way real Americans talk. The Senate doesn’t need less debating, he said. It needs actual debating about important issues in a respectful manner. Senators are elected to six-year terms so they can think long-term in what once was called the world’s greatest deliberative body. If they’re not going to fulfill their role, he asked, does the United States even need a Senate at all?

Good stuff. Last I checked, it had 3,837 views on YouTube. Here it is.

Budget deal puts off tough talk

Debt and deficits, Politics, U.S. Congress, Uncategorized

Uncle Sam hangs on for webBy Steve Brawner
© 2015 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

The good news regarding last week’s budget deal is that Congress didn’t wait until the last minute to work in a somewhat bipartisan fashion to avoid a fiscal crisis, and the results were not terrible.

You know there’s a “bad news” element to this, right?

Here’s what happened. The federal government was about to reach the debt ceiling, which is the statutory limit for how big the national debt is allowed to become. Congress reaches the ceiling every year or two, often squabbles about it, and then raises it. Outgoing Speaker John Boehner was determined to “clean out the barn” before new Speaker Paul Ryan took his place. So Congress passed the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015, a two-year budget deal that took the debt ceiling off the table until March 2017 – after the elections are over and everyone has been sworn into their new terms.

The act provides $80 billion in sequester relief over two years – meaning it increased spending. The sequester was a creation of the Budget Control Act of 2011, back when the government was adding $1 trillion in debt every year. (This year, thanks in large part to a better economy, it will be about half that.) Basically, if Congress didn’t come up with a plan to reduce those deficits on its own, spending automatically would be cut for the military and for domestic programs by $1.2 trillion over 10 years. The idea was to make the provision unpleasant enough that Congress would do its job and create a better process. It didn’t.

The sequester has been the law of the land ever since. On the plus side, it has been the most effective method Congress has created to reduce spending in a long time. On the negative side, it’s not enough. The national debt has ballooned past $18 trillion, about $57,000 for every American. It 1980, it was $1 trillion. Also, the cuts do not represent a thoughtful, careful approach to deficit reduction. It’s kind of a hacksaw when what’s needed is a scalpel, though a big one. A lot of elected officials don’t like it because they want more spending for domestic programs, the military, or both.

So negotiators came up with that $80 billion while claiming that the extra spending was offset in other parts of the budget. According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, that’s only partly correct. Meanwhile, Congress added another $31 billion in spending to the Pentagon’s Overseas Contingency Operations war-fighting account, which is exempt from the sequester.

Using a war-fighting account as a slush fund to get around the sequester and increase government spending – that’s bad policy on a lot of levels.

Five of the six members of Arkansas’ congressional delegation – Sens. John Boozman and Tom Cotton, and Reps. Rick Crawford, French Hill and Bruce Westerman – voted against the deal. Rep. Steve Womack in Northwest Arkansas’ 3rd District voted for it, saying the deal is imperfect but the debt ceiling must be raised, that the act would increase military spending, and that it would allow members of congressional Appropriations Committees to do their work in more regular order.

There are arguments to be made against having a debt ceiling, which periodically creates an avoidable crisis that brings the United States government to the brink of default and makes the markets and the rest of the world wonder when this country will ever get its act together.

On the other hand, for all its flaws, it forces elected officials to confront the national debt on a regular basis. Now Congress and President Obama have made it a little easier to avoid that awkward discussion – sort of like a family that’s going broke that always finds excuses to avoid the real issues because the time never seems to be right. And this happened during an election season, which is precisely when the time should be right.

That conversation will be difficult, if it ever occurs. It’s going to involve asking tough questions about Medicare, Social Security, the military, and other popular government programs that most Americans want more of, and taxes, which most Americans want less of. Like anything on a budget that’s not balanced, the solution will involve some combination of having less of what we like and more of what we don’t.

For now, that conversation will be limited to the campaign trail – not a place where elected officials like talking about tough choices in detail, but it will have to do.

Christie, doc fix: A little honesty in the national debt debate

Debt and deficits, Elections, Politics, U.S. Congress, Uncategorized

By Steve Brawner
© 2015 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

Uncle Sam hangs on for webA couple of things happened this past week that are worth noting because they concern senior citizens (today’s and tomorrow’s) and taxpayers (as usual, mostly tomorrow’s).

On Tuesday, the Senate sent to President Obama the long-awaited and much-discussed Medicare “doc fix.” Each of the past 17 years, Medicare payments to physicians have been scheduled to be cut automatically under something called the sustainable growth rate formula, and each of those years, Congress has suspended those cuts for one year. It’s been a charade, but one with real consequences because Medicare payments to doctors are low, and some doctors routinely threaten to stop treating those patients. Those who still do would like more certainty than these one-year fixes provide.

Now there will be no more last-minute reversals of the pretend spending cuts. The problem, as is usually the case, is that Congress did not offset the costs of the doc fix, either with spending cuts or higher taxes. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the legislation will add $141 billion to the national debt through 2025 – money that almost certainly would have been added anyway, just one year at a time.

Arkansas Sens. John Boozman and Tom Cotton voted for the doc fix, which passed 92-8. Earlier, they voted for an amendment that would have required Congress to offset the bill’s costs. That amendment failed, 58-42.

So we’re still burdening future generations with more debt, but at least we’re being more honest and transparent about it. Unfortunately, that qualifies as progress.

On the same day that the Senate passed the doc fix, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a probable presidential candidate, proposed in a speech a number of meaningful reforms to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Generally speaking, Medicare serves seniors, and Medicaid also serves seniors along with poor people and the disabled.

Christie’s proposals would affect Americans of all income classes. The retirement age would be raised to 69 very gradually (for Medicare, it would reach that age in 2064). Future senior citizens earning annual incomes above $200,000 from other sources no longer would receive Social Security benefits. Wealthier recipients would pay a higher percentage of Medicare premium costs than they do now. Christie would reform the qualification process for Social Security Disability Insurance, which has become a welfare program for younger recipients. Medicaid recipients above the poverty line would be required to pay co-pays rather than basically receive their health care for free.

Why is he talking about those popular programs? Because they are important contributors to the national debt, which has grown from less than $1 trillion in 1981 to more than $18 trillion today. According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, $24.11 of every $100 the federal government spends goes to Social Security, while $14.42 goes to Medicare and $8.60 goes to Medicaid. That’s $47.13 of every $100, an amount that will grow as the baby boomers age.

What’s important about Christie’s speech is not whether he’s offered the right answers, but that he’s talking about the subject at all. Social Security has long been called the “third rail” of American politics: Like the electrified third rail on a subway system, if you touch it, you die. Politicians would rather talk about lowering taxes and increasing spending now because the young and unborn who will pay for those decisions don’t yet vote.

Hopefully, Christie’s plan will at least start a real discussion. A government that is $18 trillion in debt and adding more every year must cut spending, increase tax revenues, or do some combination of both. Other potential presidential candidates – including the two with Arkansas ties, Hillary Clinton and Mike Huckabee – should offer their own concrete proposals, not poll-tested platitudes. Those who want to keep the status quo, or increase spending, or cut taxes should show how they will make the numbers work.

At least then we’d have an honest debate – not just about how big the government should be, but also about how today’s taxpayers pay for the government we already have.

If Christie can’t win that debate, then hopefully someone else can with their own plan that preserves an appropriate social safety net without adding to the debt. We can’t just keep passing government’s costs to our children and grandchildren – like the doc fix does, albeit transparently.

New law saves good small schools

Education, Legislature, Politics, State government, Uncategorized

By Steve Brawner
© 2015 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

Bruce Cozart sponsored Act 377.
Bruce Cozart sponsored Act 377.
Sometimes the Legislature gets it wrong, sometimes it gets it right, and sometimes it gets it right after getting it wrong for a while.

The last was the case with Act 377, signed last week by Gov. Asa Hutchinson, which lets the Arkansas State Board of Education grant waivers from consolidation to school districts that fall below the usual 350-student threshold. As a result of that bill by Rep. Bruce Cozart, R-Hot Springs, a school district can remain open if it is not in fiscal, academic or facilities distress, and if keeping it open is in the best interest of students because of long bus rides.

The 350-student minimum was created in 2003 in response to court rulings in the Lake View case that put the state and its taxpayers firmly in charge of ensuring all students’ education opportunities are “adequate” and “equitable.” (The Arkansas Constitution uses the words “general, suitable and efficient.”)

The thinking was that districts must have at least that many students to provide the necessary economies of scale to accomplish those objectives, which is usually true. Generally, districts with less than 350 students cannot cost-effectively provide high-level math and science courses and other opportunities students need. Those districts typically are in declining communities that the rest of the state’s taxpayers are not responsible for propping up. Above all, policymakers feared that messing with the funding formula would land the state back in court. Every major education decision is made with that firmly in mind.

The result of all this is that, according to the Arkansas Rural Community Alliance, 53 high schools and 48 elementary schools have been closed. For the sake of both students and taxpayers, many of them probably should have been.

The problem with that arbitrary 350-student minimum is it confuses “impossible” with merely “difficult.” Against the odds, the Weiner School District was doing well. Its academics were among the best in the state. Its facilities were good. Its finances not only were sound, but its citizens recently had voted to raise their own taxes.

It didn’t matter. Because it fell below that magic number, it was forced to consolidate in 2010 with its larger neighbor, Harrisburg, whose students were not achieving at the same levels as students in Weiner. There’s still a Weiner Elementary School, but older students travel to Harrisburg now. To this day, taxpayers who live in Weiner pay higher millage rates than those who live in Harrisburg. So far, the district’s patrons have voted not to change that situation.

Michelle Cadle stood behind Hutchinson as he signed the bill into law and was handed one of the pens he used. Her family lives in what once was the Weiner School District. Her youngest child attends Weiner Elementary, but she drives her oldest to the Valley View School District 20 miles away.

The loss still stings, but she has chosen to channel her emotion into becoming an advocate for small schools. “We always said it was never about Weiner,” she said. “It was about doing what was right for all schools across Arkansas, so this was a victory day for us.”

Hutchinson made it clear that the law is “forward looking.” In other words, it can’t be used to reopen the Weiner district. Still, Cadle said the community is looking for alternatives.

There wasn’t strong opposition to this bill. It doesn’t do away with the 350-student minimum. It merely gives the State Board of Education a tool to use when there’s an exception to the rule, like Weiner. Districts in decline still will be consolidated.

More generally, education policymakers are concerned about the lack of institutional memory in the Capitol. Because of term limits, very few legislators were in office when the Lake View case was decided. The more the case shrinks in the rearview mirror, the more it will be forgotten – until somebody sues again.

That’s a valid concern. However, the fear of that happening shouldn’t lead the state to repeat a past mistake – or put more and more kids on long bus rides unnecessarily. Regardless of its size, if a district’s students are performing well, if its finances are sound, and if its facilities are in good shape, it shouldn’t be consolidated. It should be duplicated.