Closing the achievement gap

Wisconsin boasts one of the highest high school graduation rates in the nation. But does that mean we should just sit back and breathe a collective sigh of relief, and pat ourselves on the back? No, it surely does not.

Consider this: The graduation rate for white students in our state is 86%. But the graduation rate for African Americans is only 44%, and for Hispanics only 48%. This incredible achievement gap is hardly anything to be proud of.

Data shows that Wisconsin citizens who drop out of high school are significantly more likely to be unemployed, need government assistance (Medicaid, etc.), and be incarcerated. In addition, high school dropouts earn on average $10,000 less per year than high school graduates. None of this is shocking – it all makes intuitive sense.

While this achievement gap results in very negative effects for the dropouts themselves, it also has significant negative financial implications for our state, mostly in the form of lower tax revenues and greater social costs, particularly pertaining to health care and incarceration. One study estimates that high school dropouts cost our state almost $400 million each year.

It is clear that increasing high school graduation rates, and closing the achievement gap, would be beneficial not just for the dropouts themselves, but for all Wisconsin citizens. So how do we do that?

We need to reform our education system by adding the elements of choice and competition to what right now is basically a state run monopoly. And we all know what type of results monopolies typically produce - mediocre. Choice and competition leads to better products, better service, and better outcomes, all at lower prices, in every other industry. It's time to utilize the power of the marketplace to improve our public education system.

The fact of the matter is, a lack of choice and competition in education hurts low income and minority families the most, because it is in the less wealthy school districts where we typically find the most problematic schools. To be sure, there are multiple reasons for that. But one thing we do know is that evidence shows that adding choice and competition, particularly in poorer and heavily minority districts, leads to better educational outcomes.

Take Milwaukee for instance, where a recent study just showed that students receiving vouchers in the twenty-year-old Milwaukee school choice program are graduating at a 77% rate, compared to a 65% rate for Milwaukee public school students. If over the past six years public school graduation rates had matched the rate for voucher students, an additional 3,352 students would have graduated, annually adding an additional $21.2 million in personal income for those students, and $3.6 million in extra tax revenue for the state.

And yet the state continues to cap enrollment in this successful program.

Other studies that look at voucher programs across the nation frequently show the strongest statistically significant gains occurring for minority students, particularly African Americans and Hispanics. It is no wonder then that some of the strongest supporters of vouchers are minority parents.

Private and charter schools across the nation have frequently shown successful models for educating our most vulnerable children. One need only look at American Indian Charter School in Oakland, CA, or the KIPP Schools, or the Edward Brooke Charter School in inner city Boston (which boasts some of the highest test scores in the city), the D.C. Voucher Program, or any multitude of religious and other private schools that typically spend less per student than the local public schools, but achieve better results. The reason they are able to do this? They are free of so many of the shackles, rules, and restrictions that stifle our public schools and prevent them from innovating. That and the fact that they have to compete for students, please parents, and produce results - or risk going out of business.

So here we have a problem – a great achievement gap between white and minority students – and we have proven techniques for closing that gap in charters and vouchers. Yet our state legislators continue to defend the status quo, protecting special interests within the education establishment at the expense of our children – particularly our most vulnerable children.

How long before we stand up and say "Enough is enough!"? Choice and competition in education is good for our state and our economy. But more importantly, it is great for our children.

Springtime

Ah, springtime: Trees budding on the tips of branches. Flowers poking their small green stems out of the ground. Birds chirping happily in the sunlit morning. Trash littering the side of the highway. Oh the trash.

If you've lived in Wisconsin long enough, you're aware of the embarrassing and disgusting sight that adorns our highways each spring after the snow melts. The trash that has built up all winter long, hidden by the beautiful fresh fallen snow, is finally exposed and displayed for all to see. It's not pretty.

In a way, it is quite indicative of the political landscape right now too. Politicians are the kings and queens of snow jobs. Politicians will invariably tell us that their intentions are as pure as the wind driven snow. But whether that be the case or not, often lurking beneath the snow is a lot of trash.

Nancy Pelosi recently said of the health care bill that "we have to pass the bill so we can find out what is in it." Both sides of this issue have been laying on the snow thick for over a year now. Does anyone really doubt what's under it? Take a drive on the highway and you'll get a hint.

Some will say, "Sure it's a flawed bill, but we'll fix it after it's passed," just as the motorist who throws his garbage out the window says "Someone will clean that up in the spring." In addition, both sides have proven that facts frequently get buried along with the trash.

Politicians do a great job of keeping the snow falling, and keeping the trash hidden. Maybe that's why the President is still out there campaigning for the bill even after stating that, "Everything there is to say about health care has been said." Then why is he still crossing the country talking about it? Best not put your skis away for the season just yet.

I know good and decent people can and do disagree on the health care issue – I have wonderful friends on both sides. But I think one thing we can all agree on is that we've certainly experienced a horrendous blizzard from both sides this past year. And political blizzards are usually created to hide one thing, and one thing only: Trash.

It's time for American citizens to elect true public servants that will bring the heat to melt the snow, expose the garbage, and clean it up. Just as we experience each spring, the clean-up job won't be easy. And we'll certainly be fighting an uphill battle against the career politicians who littered the landscape in the first place. But there is only one way back to "government of the people, by the people, and for the people" – and that is for the people to take back the government.

Happy Spring to everyone. Now let's get to work on that garbage.

“Right track, wrong track” and what it tells us

Rasmussen Reports' recent "Right Track, Wrong Track" poll shows that just 25% of Americans believe the country is on the "right track." While I happen to be in the majority opinion here, I sometimes wonder about how to interpret results like this.

Upon seeing such low poll numbers, one might conclude that the vast majority of Americans are against President Obama's agenda. But is that really the case? Consider the following four individuals:

Jane is a strong Democrat and an Obama supporter. She voted for Obama and very much wants health care reform to pass. However, she is increasingly disgusted that her own party, with its majorities in Congress and the Presidency, cannot get this bill signed into law. In addition, she is irritated at what she calls "the obstructionist Republicans" who are making it harder to get anything done. Jane thinks we are on the wrong track.

Steve is a life-long Republican and is against almost everything on the President's and Congress' agenda. He sees them as trying to socialize medicine and cripple the economy through cap-and-trade environmental legislation. Accordingly, Steve thinks we are on the wrong track.

Mary is an Independent. She doesn't pay much attention to politics, but when she does all she sees is bickering, finger-pointing, and politicians handing out favors to special interests. In fact, that is why she doesn't pay much attention – it's just too damn depressing. She thinks the government needs to take some action to fix some problems, but isn't sure what should be done. But one thing she does know is that our current politicians are unlikely to be able to work together to figure out a solution. Mary thinks we are on the wrong track.

Torrey is a Libertarian, and is completely disgusted at the growth of government under both Republican and Democratic leadership. He sees glimmers of common ground on some issues in either party, but largely views them both as Big Government adherents, limiting individual liberty, and straying from the small, limited government dictated in the Constitution. Torrey thinks we are on the wrong track.

Ok, so here I describe four fictional people (well, three fictional and one real), all who feel the country is on the wrong track, but for potentially very different reasons. It is because of this that I just don't know what to read into a dismal poll number like this.

I guess the only thing one can read into it with any confidence is that the American people simply don't believe the government is on the right track to solve the myriad problems we're presented with these days. There may be many differences of opinion within this "wrong track" group as to what the best course of action forward is, but overall these people just don't have confidence that the government can "get it done" on major issues.

Which is my point exactly. Strong centralized government has never been good at solving problems. The great libertarian economist Milton Friedman once said:

"The great advances of civilization, whether in architecture or painting, in science or literature, in industry or agriculture, have never come from centralized government."

And I assure you, the next great advances, whether they be in health care, poverty reduction, education, or anything else, will also not come from centralized government. Those things will come from free individuals working together, charitably and with a great sense of personal responsibility, free of government interference. Government can get in the way – and it often does. Government can come to the table with the best of intentions – and it often does. But government, by its nature, simply cannot efficiently and effectively solve these problems – and it often doesn't.

Luckily, a free society can - or at least has the best chance. My hopes will always rest on a free, responsible, and charitable society, protected by a small and limited constitutional government.