DECEMBER 2017
OKLAHOMA COUNCIL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS
Fresh Air Time
Trent England does conservative talk radio with depth and substance
In Case You Missed It Economist John Mueller says our GDP might actually be twice as big as we think it is.
Some of TSET’s spending decisions are drawing scrutiny. ocpa.co/TSETscrutiny
ocpa.co/HiddenEconomy
OCPA distinguished fellow Andrew Spiropoulos says if lawmakers invest in schoolchoice programs they can free up a lot of cash for public schools.
Under the leadership of president Mitch Daniels, Purdue University has frozen tuition for six years in a row and reduced room-and-board costs by five percent.
ocpa.co/ChoiceSavesMoney
ocpa.co/LessonsFromPurdue
OCPA president Jonathan Small tells FOX 25 that the Oklahoma City and Tulsa school districts are pursuing too many distractions. ocpa.co/SmallOnLawsuit
An average scholarly article in a peer-reviewed journal is read in its entirety by no more than 10 people. ocpa.co/NoMoreThan10
In a fiscal-impact study of Oklahoma’s school-choice tax credit program, two Oklahoma City University economists found that for every $1 in tax credits issued to donors the state saves $1.24.
Many of Oklahoma’s “limited government” conservatives have changed their tune. ocpa.co/ChangeOfTune
School choice can help keep children safe from bullying.
ocpa.co/TaxCreditSavesMoney
PERSPECTIVE
ocpa.co/ChoiceKeepsKidsSafe
Oklahoma’s budget-conscious state lawmakers should appreciate parents who undertake the hard work (and expense) of educating their own children at home. ocpa.co/HomeTeachers
Brandon Dutcher, Editor
OCPA Trustees
OCPA Researchers
Glenn Ashmore • Oklahoma City
Melissa Sandefer • Norman
Robert D. Avery • Pawhuska
Thomas Schroedter • Tulsa
Lee J. Baxter • Lawton
Greg Slavonic • Oklahoma City
Douglas Beall, M.D. • Oklahoma City
Charles M. Sublett • Tulsa
Inc., an independent public policy
Susan Bergen • Norman
Robert Sullivan • Tulsa
organization. OCPA formulates and
John A. Brock • Tulsa
William E. Warnock, Jr. • Tulsa
David Burrage • Atoka
Dana Weber • Tulsa
Michael Carnuccio • Yukon
Molly Wehrenberg • Edmond
analysis consistent with the principles
William Flanagan • Claremore
Daryl Woodard • Tulsa
of free enterprise and limited
Josephine Freede • Oklahoma City
Perspective is published monthly by the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs,
promotes public policy research and
government. The views expressed in Perspective are those of the author, and should not be construed as representing any official position of OCPA or its trustees, researchers, or employees.
2
PERSPECTIVE // December 2017
Ann Felton Gilliland • Oklahoma City John A. Henry III • Oklahoma City Robert Kane • Tulsa Frank Keating • Oklahoma City Gene Love • Lawton
EMERITUS BOARD
Tom H. McCasland III • Duncan
Blake Arnold • Oklahoma City
David McLaughlin • Enid
Steve W. Beebe • Duncan
J. Larry Nichols • Oklahoma City
David R. Brown, M.D. • Oklahoma City
Lloyd Noble II • Tulsa
Paul A. Cox • Oklahoma City
Mike O’Neal • Edmond
John T. Hanes • Oklahoma City
Andrew Oster • Edmond
Henry F. Kane • Bartlesville
Larry Parman • Oklahoma City
Lew Meibergen • Enid
Bill Price • Oklahoma City
Ronald L. Mercer • Bethany
Patrick T. Rooney • Oklahoma City
Daniel J. Zaloudek • Tulsa
Tina Dzurisin Research Associate Trent England, J.D. Dr. David and Ann Brown Distinguished Fellow for the Advancement of Liberty J. Scott Moody, M.A. Research Fellow Andrew C. Spiropoulos, J.D. Milton Friedman Distinguished Fellow Wendy P. Warcholik, Ph.D. Research Fellow
Fresh Air Time Trent England does conservative talk radio with depth and substance
By Mike Brake
When Trent England first began considering a career in public policy, he never envisioned himself as one, like Rush Limbaugh or Dennis Prager, who takes to the airwaves each day to enlighten a broad audience. But that’s exactly what he does each morning from what is coming to be called the “OCPA studios” at NE 13 and Lincoln in Oklahoma City. The Trent England show broadcasts on KZLS (AM 1640) from 7 to 9 a.m. each weekday, the coveted morning drive slot that traditionally draws the largest audiences. The Enid station’s coverage extends well into the metro Oklahoma City market, and OCPA is already hoping to extend the show’s reach. England, OCPA’s executive vice
president and the Dr. David and Ann Brown Distinguished Fellow for the Advancement of Liberty, previously served in a similar role with the Freedom Foundation in Washington state and was a legal policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation. A graduate of Claremont McKenna College in government who earned a law degree from George Mason University, England said he was occasionally interviewed on news-talk radio programs early in his career, but gave no thought to the idea of becoming a host himself. That changed in Washington. “We had a supporter who owned a network of radio stations and he offered us airtime for a weekend show,” he recalled. The show later morphed into
www.ocpathink.org
3
a weekday program, with England increasingly learning to drive its agenda from behind the microphone. “All of a sudden we controlled a half hour of airtime every day,” he said. “That was the first time I had ever done anything like that.” OCPA’s show on KZLS was launched in February of 2015, initially at mid-morning, but England noted that “people seemed to like it so it was moved to morning drive.” The show for a time ran for three hours but now spans a more comfortable and manageable 120 minutes. OCPA underwrites the minimal production costs and KZLS sells commercial time. The rest of the station’s daily broadcast schedule consists of nationally syndicated news-talk programming. England broadcasts from his office at OCPA, where he has an audio engineering board, microphones for himself and any in-studio guests, and a webcam which he occasionally uses to stream the show on Facebook. Each day’s show is recorded and posted on the OCPA website as a podcast. England estimates a daily audience of 10,000 to 20,000, with additional exposure to the daily podcasts. So what is the show all about? “Our mission is to disseminate information,” he said. The show does not feature listener call-ins like Limbaugh and many other news-talk programs, although England said he would like to add that in the future. Most shows feature at least one guest who may come to the studio/office or be connected by telephone. “I try to focus on issues and events in a way that most media do not, in more depth,” he said. A show might discuss events in Europe for a time and then turn to activity at the Oklahoma Capitol. “I look for stories that are not covered enough, or are not covered in the right way.” He said he tries to dedicate the second hour of each Friday’s show to discussion of a basic principle. England calls that
4
PERSPECTIVE // December 2017
segment “The Thoughtful Patriot.” Guests on the show have ranged from EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt and Sen. James Lankford and former Gov. Frank Keating to OCPA scholars and elected state officials. England often interviews public policy experts from the Heritage Foundation as well.
For example, shows during the last week of October covered a wide range of topics and guests:
• A detailed discussion of the
• Adam Andrzejewski, of
ongoing budget haggling by
OpentheBooks.com, on the
those involved in the special
need to expose details of
legislative session.
government spending.
• An interview with Steve
• Discussion of ways the
Milloy of junkscience.com
Oklahoma City Public Schools
on the use of questionable
tries to downplay poor
scientific findings by
student test scores.
environmentalists. • Constitutional law expert • John Tidwell, Oklahoma state director of Americans for
Todd Gaziano of the Pacific Legal Foundation.
Prosperity, discussing state tax policy.
• Talk about the initial indictments in the Robert
• A taped interview with
Mueller investigation
radio host and recent OCPA
of Russian meddling in
speaker Dennis Prager on his
American elections.
concerns over the “second American Civil War.”
• A wide-ranging discussion with OCPA investigative
• Discussion of Senate
reporter Jay Chilton on
filibustering of federal
everything from the World
judicial nominees.
Series to steam trains.
England said he spends an hour or more each day planning the following morning’s show, scanning headlines to see what is current in the news and considering how to explore it in a deeper way. His shows are not scripted and may turn from one topic to another as the discussion with guests proceeds. “I love radio partly because it doesn’t have all the trappings of TV,” he said. “Nobody can see you just talking to a microphone. You can get into things that are more substantive. It is more about information and education.” England said his dream guests would be past and present first ladies because “they could tell you so much about how the White House works.” He said while he welcomes elected
officials, “I don’t like to give airtime just to read talking points.” He never endorses candidates or parties and tries to keep discussions above the traditional “he said/she said” back-and-forth of most broadcast news programs. The primary goal is depth. That of course suggests a thoughtful audience in search of substance, which would be a blue chip target for radio advertisers. That’s why England is hopeful that the show’s reach can be expanded to other state radio outlets. While KZLS does reach into the Oklahoma City market, Tulsa and everything east of I-35, as well as most of western and southwestern Oklahoma, remain beyond the station’s reach. “We would love to get picked up
on more radio stations in Oklahoma,” England said. “We are actively seeking to syndicate the show.” Other options include growing the listening audience via increasingly popular alternatives such as podcasting and/or Facebook Live. Meanwhile, listeners can tune in each weekday to be educated, informed, challenged, and often entertained by what is Oklahoma’s primary news-talk outlet with a decided free market and individual liberty slant. Mike Brake is a journalist and writer who recently authored a centennial history of Putnam City Schools. He served as chief writer for Gov. Frank Keating and for Lt. Gov. and Congresswoman Mary Fallin, and has also served as an adjunct instructor at OSU-OKC.
WEEKDAYS 7-9 A.M. PRESENTED BY THE OKLAHOMA COUNCIL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS
AM 1640 | KZLSAM.COM REPLAY AVAILABLE AT OCPATHINK.ORG/RADIO
www.ocpathink.org
5
By J. Scott Moody and Wendy Warcholik
Religion Helps Oklahoma’s Fight against Illicit Drug Use and Overdoses Strong families are the foundation of healthy communities, upward economic mobility, and a robust civil society. Unfortunately, Oklahoma families aren’t flourishing the way they once were. Oklahoma ranks a middling 21st in the 2017 Family Prosperity Index (www.familyprosperity.org). Political leaders know there are both economic and social costs that harm society, such as dependency, a poor business climate, substance abuse, unemployment, low educational attainment, and crime. But they struggle to craft policies to mitigate these costs in the long run. Utilizing the Family Prosperity Index, which accounts for both the economic and social behavior of people in a state, legislative, business, and religious leaders can have a crystal-clear view of the most important stories in their state. One of the most critical stories right now in Oklahoma is that of opioid abuse and overdose deaths. These problems impose a significant economic and social burden on society. For example, a 2011 study by the National Drug Intelligence Center found that the total cost of U.S. illicit drug use in 2007 was $193 billion. This came in the form of increased crime ($113 billion), health care costs ($11 billion), and lost productivity ($68 billion). This is a conservative estimate because it does not include the recent spike in drug overdose deaths. Oklahoma’s illicit drug use rate, as a percent of population, has hovered around the national average since 2002. In 2014, Oklahoma had the 35th highest illicit drug use rate at 6.9 percent. The problem in Oklahoma stems from the composition of illicit
6
PERSPECTIVE // December 2017
drugs: Oklahoma ranks 11th highest in the nation in the use of drugs such as opioids and heroin. A significant reason for Oklahoma’s relatively low overall illicit drug use rate is the state’s above-average religious attendance. In 2015, 47 percent of Oklahomans attended church at least once per week (tied with Kentucky and Texas for the 11th highest nationally). This is 24 percent above the national average of 38 percent. The importance of this is shown in Chart 1, which plots the religious weekly attendance rate and the illicit drug use rate for the 50 states (as averaged between 2008 and 2014). The northeastern states dominate the upper left quadrant of the chart where low religiosity is correlated with high drug use, while deep southern states and Utah dominate the lower right quadrant where high religiosity is correlated with low drug use. Oklahoma had above-average church attendance (48 percent vs. 40 percent) and lower-than-average illicit drug use (6.9 percent vs. 7.3 percent). How frequently one attends church significantly lowers the odds of a person using illicit drugs, wherever they may live. In fact, in 2016 Gallup performed an extensive analysis of their polling data on the rate of marijuana use among various subgroups. Gallup found that “only two percent of weekly churchgoers and seven percent of less frequent attenders say they use marijuana, but this rises to 14 percent of those who seldom or never attend a religious service.” Additionally, a large and growing body of evidence shows that
religion cannot only help prevent people from using illicit drugs, but it plays a strong role in effective treatment programs. Consider the findings of two comprehensive studies.
Second, a 2005 study from the Annie E. Casey Foundation found: Religion is an important protective factor against substance abuse and an important support for persons in recovery. Religious people are less likely than others to use drugs and less likely to experience negative drug-related consequences. As mentioned earlier, Oklahoma policymakers should be concerned about the composition of illicit drug use. Oklahoma’s illicit drug use (other than marijuana) rate, as a percent of population, has exceeded the national average almost every year (this includes deadly opioids and heroin). In 2014, Oklahoma had the 11th highest illicit drug use (other than marijuana) rate, at three percent. Consequently, as shown in Chart 2, Oklahoma’s drug overdose rate has been significantly above the national average over the 2000 to 2015 time period. While there was a fortunate dip in 2015, Oklahoma’s overdose rate was ranked 20th highest at 0.0192 percent (751 deaths). Overall, Oklahoma’s above-average church attendance is suppressing overall illicit drug use, which mitigates total economic and social damage. At the same time, Oklahoma’s illicit drug use rate is skewed toward non-marijuana drugs such as opioids and heroin. Unfortunately, this has led to Oklahoma’s higher than average overdose rate. Clearly policymakers should engage Oklahoma’s religious and civic leaders in the ongoing fight against this deadly epidemic.
CHART 1
Weekly Religious Attendance Lowers Illicit Drug Use (Data Averaged 2008 to 2014)
0.13% Vermont
Rhode Island
0.12% 0.11 % Massachusetts Illicit Drug Use
0.10 % 0.09 %
Oklahoma
New Hampshire Maine
0.08 %
Alabama Mississippi
0.07 % 0.06 %
Louisiana
0.05 % 0.04 %
Utah 0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.55
0.6
Weekly Religious Attendance
Sources: U.S. Department of Health & Human Services: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Gallup; American Conservative Union Foundation
CHART 2
Drug Overdose (Calendar Years 2000 to 2015)
0.040% 0.035%
United States Oklahoma West Virginia Nebraska
0.030% Percent of Population
First, a 2001 study from The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse found: God, religion, and spirituality are key factors for many in prevention and treatment of substance abuse and in continuing recovery … Adults who never attend religious services are almost twice as likely to drink, three time likelier to smoke, more than five times likelier to have used an illicit drug other than marijuana, almost seven times likelier to binge drink, and almost eight times likelier to use marijuana than those who attend religious services at least weekly … Teens who never attend religious services are twice as likely to drink, more than twice as likely to smoke, more than three times likelier to use marijuana and binge drink, and almost four times likelier to use illicit drugs than teens who attend religious services at least weekly.
0.025% 0.020% 0.015% 0.010% 0.005% 0%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Sources: U.S. Department of Health & Human Services: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; American Conservative Union Foundation
OCPA research fellow J. Scott Moody
OCPA research fellow Wendy P.
(M.A., George Mason University) is a
Warcholik (Ph.D., George Mason
senior fellow at the American Conservative
University) is a senior fellow at the
Union. Formerly a senior economist
American Conservative Union. She
at the Tax Foundation and a senior
formerly served as an economist at
economist at the Heritage Foundation, he
the U.S. Department of Commerce’s
has twice testified before the Ways and
Bureau of Economic Analysis, and
Means Committee of the U.S. House of
was the chief forecasting economist
Representatives. Moody is the co-creator
for the Commonwealth of Virginia’s
of the Tax Foundation’s popular “State
Department of Medical Assistance
Business Tax Climate Index.” His work has
Services. She is a co-creator
appeared in Forbes, CNN Money, State
(with J. Scott Moody) of the Tax
Tax Notes, The Oklahoman, and several
Foundation’s popular “State
other publications.
Business Tax Climate Index.”
www.ocpathink.org
7
By Jonathan Small
TSET Reforms, Medicaid Audits Will Help the Most Vulnerable Former Gov. Frank Keating and Oklahoma City physician Doug Beall—both OCPA trustees—recently entered the national health care debate with a column in The Wall Street Journal. Their thesis? Medicaid must be dramatically reformed if we are to avoid bankruptcy for the states and return the program to its original goal of helping the most vulnerable. Keating and Beall cite some frightening statistics. Even after Oklahoma wisely opted out of the Medicaid expansion included in Obamacare, our share of the costs has reached $2.1 billion annually, an astounding 194 percent increase from the $714 million we spent as recently as 2003. Yet, in those years, per capita incomes in Oklahoma rose by 71 percent. They also noted that almost one in four Oklahomans are now enrolled in Medicaid. The program covers 57 percent of all childbirths. Nearly three-fourths of all Oklahoma children will be covered by Medicaid at some point between birth and kindergarten. It doesn’t take an actuarial expert to project a future when Medicaid consumes an increasingly disastrous portion of our state budget, crowding out other needs like schools and roads. Yet the Medicaid expansion sold under Obamacare, which
would have raised eligibility to thousands of able-bodied adults if Oklahoma had gone along, would have only made these problems worse, further hurting the very people Medicaid was supposed to assist. Nor is Medicaid a bargain for those it covers. Due to exploding enrollment burdening our system, reimbursement rates have steadily declined, resulting in one in three doctors declining to accept Medicaid patients. This results in more Medicaid clients going to emergency rooms or avoiding medical care altogether, precisely what the program was meant to prevent. So what is to be done? Keating and Beall suggested block grants and giving Medicaid clients greater responsibility for their health outcomes through health savings accounts that let them set aside funds for many medical expenses. They could also enroll in less costly direct primary care programs. Another idea: tobacco settlement reforms. OCPA suggested earlier this year that all future payments to the Tobacco Settlement Endowment Trust (TSET) from the Master Settlement Agreement be directed to a rural healthcare infrastructure fund. This fund would be used for the cost of health care reimbursement to rural areas that struggle with revenue stream diversity for their hospitals and have suffered actual dollar losses. The fund would also be used to fund the Physician Manpower Training Commission and shore up nursing home provider rates. Finally, it remains vital that states impose rigorous audits of Medicaid rolls to prevent abuse. Such audits simply identify those receiving benefits for which they are ineligible. Earlier this year, OCPA estimated that audits would save Oklahoma $85.6 million annually. A quick look at the experiences of other states proves this is a reform worth implementing. When Illinois strengthened its Medicaid eligibility auditing procedures, a random check of recipient files found 34 percent contained errors. Those new auditing requirements detected some 600,000 people who were on the Medicaid rolls but were found to be ineligible. Annual savings? As high as $430 million. Pennsylvania implemented more stringent audits of Medicaid eligibility. They found 220,000 people receiving benefits they did not deserve. As with most forms of public assistance, eligibility for Medicaid is based largely on self-reported data such as income
ALMOST
1/ 4
$ 2 ,10 0 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
ENROLLED
OKL AHOM A
8
PERSPECTIVE // December 2017
19 4 % INCREASE FROM 2003
Jonathan Small is the president of the Oklahoma
By refusing to adopt the Obamacare Medicaid expansion, Oklahoma lawmakers stood up for the premise that Medicaid should remain a safety net for the most vulnerable, not an entitlement for able-bodied adults. And yet Medicaid has been growing in Oklahoma nonetheless, eating up an ever larger portion of state spending.
OKLAHOMA HEALTH CARE AUTHORITY
Source: Oklahoma Senate, oksenate.gov
Total Expenses Appropriations
6 5 4 3 BILLIONS
and household size. And with one in four Oklahomans receiving some form of benefits through Medicaid, it’s only responsible to make sure everyone is actually eligible. More rigorous audits will help detect misuse and save taxpayer dollars. Legislation considered this year adds the process of quarterly audits and requirements to confirm information with several databases to ensure maintained eligibility. What motivates Medicaid fraud by some recipients? Some legitimate recipients might “share” their Medicaid card with someone else. Others may be drug addicts who use Medicaid to doctor shop for prescriptions. Others are simply taking advantage of the taxpayers to present bogus information to get on the Medicaid rolls. The best way to help the truly vulnerable is to have a Medicaid system that is stable and free from abuse. Lawmakers should focus their efforts on improving the program for those it was meant to serve. This is not about removing deserving recipients from Medicaid. It would only target ineligible use of the system, just as state authorities try to root out and prosecute health care providers who submit phony claims. In sum, Medicaid was created in 1965 as a means to assist the most vulnerable among us. It was never intended to bankrupt state or federal budgets or to be a back-door, single-payer system for an ever-expanding client base. As Keating and Beall suggest, if you are driving a rusty 1965 car that requires endless costly repairs, it’s time for a new model.
Medicaid Costs Continue to Rise
2 1 0
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
The Oklahoma Health Care Authority (OHCA) administers the state’s Medicaid program. During last year’s budget debate, OHCA leaders again called for Medicaid expansion and threatened that, without it, most Oklahoma nursing homes would shut down. It was a craven claim, easily disproved, and both appropriations and total spending at OHCA actually went up. In fact, Medicaid enrollment and costs have been increasing in Oklahoma for years. A higher percentage of Oklahomans are covered by either Medicaid or the related Children’s Health Insurance Program than in Texas, Kansas, Missouri, and a dozen other states. Looking at data from all states between 2000 and 2014, The Pew Charitable Trusts found Oklahoma had the 11th largest increase in state Medicaid spending as a share of the total state budget. In 2008, the legislature appropriated $771 million to the agency. The agency had 410 staff and spent a total of $3.8 billion. OHCA last year had 556 staff, and (as shown in the chart below) received an appropriation of nearly $1 billion to support total spending of $5.6 billion. (Numbers come from Senate reports; the Governor’s budget book includes similar and additional data.)
Council of Public Affairs. A Certified Public Accountant, he previously served as a budget analyst for the Oklahoma Office of State Finance, as a fiscal policy analyst and research analyst for the Oklahoma House of Representatives, and as director of government affairs for the Oklahoma Insurance Department. Small’s work includes coauthoring “Economics 101” with Dr. Arthur Laffer and Dr. Wayne Winegarden.
OHCA has a critical mission. Medicaid was designed to be the safety net for those who are both poor and also disabled, elderly, or children. Oklahoma is spending more than ever on these programs. Both taxpayers (who foot the bill for every state and federal dollar) and service recipients deserve an honest conversation about these costs and an active consideration of reforms. —Trent England
www.ocpathink.org
9
2017
By Byron Schlomach
When It Comes to Cost of Living, Red States Win Where would you rather be poor—in a red state or a blue state? Blue states generally offer richer social benefits on paper. So at first glance, it seems like you’re better off being poor in California than in Mississippi. On the other hand, some in blue states have complained about how red states get more money from the feds per dollar of federal taxes paid than blue states. How does all that add up? When cost of living is taken into account, this distorted picture straightens out. Blue states and red states live in different cost-ofliving realities—and red states have the economic edge. Why is this? Federal entitlement policies are substantially driven by the federal poverty level, an amount of income used to determine eligibility for programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and Medicaid. The federal poverty level for a family of four in the lower 48 states is $24,600, whether that family lives in San Francisco or Fort Worth. But when federal poverty levels are adjusted to account for cost of living in various locations, the federal poverty level is transformed into relative purchasing power. Average purchasing power at the federal poverty level in the 20 states plus Washington, D.C. that voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016 is $21,078 for a family of four—less than the federal poverty level, thanks to blue states’ high cost of living. By contrast, in the 30 states that voted for President Donald Trump, the average purchasing power at the four-person federal poverty level is $26,239 due to their low cost of living. In blue states like Hawaii, California, New York, and Massachusetts, the federal poverty level seems way too low because their cost of living is high. People in Connecticut intuitively know how little $25,000 can buy in that state. To them and others in high-cost states, $24,600 for four people is a pittance. But in Mississippi and other low-cost red states, many likely consider $24,600 to be generous or at least about right. These different realities translate into states’ social policies and voting.
10
PERSPECTIVE // December 2017
Many federal programs require state and federal cost sharing, with states allowed some discretion in the degree of participation. Local circumstances play a role in states’ policymaking—cost of living differences help explain differences in policies. Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act is particularly inappropriate for low-cost states, and they have acted accordingly: Of the 19 states that have not expanded Medicaid, 17 are red states. Blue states, by contrast, continue to push for federal program expansions, which would dominate red states’ government budgets. While the federal government treats red states relatively generously due to their lower incomes—incomes that aren’t really that low given their lower cost of living—this generosity comes at a cost to red states, since many federal programs require matching funds. Blue states, treated less generously by the federal government due to their high cost of living and accompanying higher incomes, push for federal program expansion unsuited for and unwanted by red states. Red states perceive federal largesse as threatening their fiscal situations, while blue states see federal largesse as hardly largesse at all. While it might be tempting to require that the federal government adjust the federal poverty level for each state according to cost of living, it should not. Cost of living is related to state and local regulations—zoning, minimum wages, occupational licensing, and the absence of right-to-work laws. Having the federal government adjust the federal poverty level for each state’s cost of living would only reinforce costly policy decisions made at state and local levels. There is no sound ethical or policy justification for the federal government to financially support poor decision-making by states while penalizing good decisions. Instead, lawmakers in high-cost states should pursue policies to reduce the cost of living. The ball is in their court, not Congress’s court. Byron Schlomach (Ph.D., Texas A&M University) is director of the 1889 Institute.
By Jonathan Butcher
When Quality Education Becomes a Matter of National Security Surveys of our men and women in uniform indicate that finding a quality education for their children is a matter of national security. A 2017 Military Times/Collaborative for Student Success survey of service members found that 35 percent of respondents said that “dissatisfaction with a child’s education was or is ‘a significant factor’ in deciding whether or not to continue military service.” According to the Heritage Foundation’s 2018 Index of Military Strength, our armed forces already lack the resources they need. When quality of life indicators, such as access to a great education for their children, are a concern, the Military Times survey suggests more than one-third of our military could have second thoughts about extended service. Washington should give our military families more access to learning opportunities. An EdChoice survey conducted by Braun Research, Inc., finds that 72 percent of active-duty members, veterans, and their spouses are in favor of using education savings accounts when informed of how the accounts work. Now law in six states, education savings accounts give families the opportunity to customize a child’s education. States deposit a portion of a child’s funding from a state’s education formula into a private account that parents use to buy educational products and services for their children. Parents can buy online classes, hire a personal tutor, and pay private school tuition, to name a few possible uses. Families can save money from year to year to prepare for additional high school or even college needs. The accounts can help make reassignment easier for military families. When asked, “Did moving between states as part of your military service add challenges to your children’s education?” 70 percent of respondents to the Military Times survey said yes. In the EdChoice survey, 39 percent of military parents that used to have school-aged children and 31 percent of current military parents report enrolling their oldest child in at least four schools.
Jonathan Butcher (second from left) is pictured here at a 2014 panel discussion in Oklahoma City entitled "School Choice 2.0: Education Savings Accounts." Also pictured (from left) are OCPA distinguished fellow Andrew Spiropoulos, education researcher Matthew Ladner, and Heritage Foundation scholar Lindsey Burke.
Military families are also more than twice as likely as civilian families to say that they moved homes to be closer to their child’s school (37 percent vs. 17 percent). With an education savings account, parents can use the funds to make a choice that works for their child. If the local district school to which a student is assigned is low-performing, the accounts will allow military parents to find an alternative. The EdChoice survey demonstrates that military families are already making sacrifices for their children’s educations. Fifty-six percent of respondents said they have “significantly changed their routine” for the sake of their child’s education, compared to the national average of 38 percent. To offer military families the opportunity to use education savings accounts, lawmakers could redirect some of the federal funds for K-12 children in military families (called “Impact Aid”) to students’ accounts. Today, Impact Aid provides federal funds to districts to help educate 150,000 students living onand off-base, along with tens of thousands of other militaryconnected students throughout the country. Even if the accounts are made available to service members’ families, no family would be forced to use an account. The local public and private school options, along with homeschooling, would still be available to them without an account. And no public schools have closed due to savings account usage in states with account laws—generally, one percent or less of a state’s public school enrollment has opted to use an account since 2011 (in Arizona, Florida, Tennessee, and Mississippi). But for military parents that need access to something other than their assigned district school, the accounts can be a lifechanging opportunity. “Military parents are going above and beyond the national average when it comes to supporting their children’s K-12 educational experiences,” write the EdChoice survey authors, adding that there is “an opportunity to give real schooling power to military families, who have already sacrificed so much for their country.” Jonathan Butcher (M.A. in economics, University of Arkansas) is a senior policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation and a senior fellow at the Goldwater Institute. His work has appeared in EducationNext, the Georgetown Journal of Law and Public Policy, The Wall Street Journal, Education Week, National Review Online, and several other newspapers across the country.
www.ocpathink.org
11
By Greg Forster
Oklahoma’s ESSA Plan Oklahoma has submitted its mandatory education plan to the federal government. Under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), the federal government must approve the state’s plan as a condition of federal funding. More than anything else, Oklahoma’s plan illustrates the bankruptcy of both the moribund Old Guard of educational special interests and the New Guard of education reformers who focus on the federal government. If you want to see a stark visual representation of everything that’s gone wrong with education policy, go to the state’s website and download the full 218-page, eight-year strategic plan. Throughout the document, the bright, photogenic images and superficial, focus-group-tested buzzwords favored by the professional education reformers who run the ESSA regime collide over and over again with dense, esoteric clouds of opaque legalese, emitted—like ink from an octopus—by education special interests protecting their budgetary turf from scrutiny. The document even has two title pages. The first is slick and professionally designed: a gorgeous, full-page image of a little girl with her hand over her heart is juxtaposed with the title under which the plan is being marketed—Oklahoma EDGE—in the form of a branded logo, like Pepsi or Google. The second title page is plain white with nothing on it but a little bit of text and the state education department’s logo. This page delivers the plan’s legal (i.e., actual) title, which is: “Revised State Template for the Consolidated State Plan: The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act.” Try making a branded logo out of that. This visual bifurcation reflects the substantive bifurcation of the plan itself. The document begins with four Pillars, then presents six Goals, then six Initiatives. The comprehensive train wreck of education policy in our time can be mapped out by understanding how these pieces relate to one another. The Pillars are broad principles or aspirations for improving education, such as “Achieve Academic Success” and “Build Exceptional Educators and Schools.” Each of these Pillars is composed of several Strategies (e.g., “Strategy 1.6: Enable
12
PERSPECTIVE // December 2017
Oklahoma’s students to benefit fully from digital-age teaching and learning”). Like horoscopes and fortune cookies, these Pillars and Strategies are designed to sound grand while remaining so vague that they can be interpreted in almost any way that happens to fit your particular preferences. The purpose of this vagueness becomes clear when we compare the six Goals with the six Initiatives. The Goals, most of which are highly specific and relate at least somewhat to real educational outcomes, were written to satisfy the professional reformers who run the federal ESSA regime. The Initiatives, which describe the things Oklahoma will do to achieve the Goals, were written to satisfy the state’s education bureaucracy. The Goals and the Initiatives have, so far as I can tell, absolutely nothing to do with one another. This fact is an indictment of both the Old Guard and the New. Let’s start with what’s wrong with the Old Guard. The state’s six Goals are mostly (we’ll come back to that later) laudable stuff as far as they go. Oklahoma wants to be in the top 20 states on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, a good indicator of basic achievement; be in the top 10 states for high school graduation rates; reduce English and math remediation after high school by 50 percent; and so on. However, the Initiatives are mostly geared toward feeding the bureaucracy additional money. They focus on the kind of programs that have never produced evidence of improving academic outcomes. The principle guiding the initiatives seems to be not “what will accomplish the Goals?” but “what are the most politically feasible ways of increasing our budgets?” Some state media have focused, for example, on the plan’s hearty appetite for expanding free meal programs. As the plan states: “Oklahoma’s goal is to increase participation of eligible schools providing free meal access to all students from 34% to 75% by 2025 … In 2016, the OSDE [i.e., the state education department] served more than 35 million breakfasts in Oklahoma and, through alternative methods, seeks to increase participation 20% by 2025 … In 2016, the number of meals served in the
summer was 1,438,852. Oklahoma’s goal is to increase this number by 30% by 2025.” Just for a moment, set aside that this is an increasing encroachment of state bureaucracy upon the family in one of its most intimate functions—providing our daily bread. And never mind that taxpayers are not exactly awash in spare funds for this sort of thing. Consider instead that public schools in the U.S. have been offering more and more meals for students for two generations, and there is not even a hint of a demonstrated link between increasing meal coverage in schools and educational outcomes. Despite the plan’s assertions (in which an ill-defined concept of “food insecurity” is conflated with actual hunger) the track record has produced no reason to think that there is any link between this kind of program and the outcomes (test scores, graduation rates) the state purports to care about. If families in Oklahoma are so broken down that they’re not feeding their kids, by all means let’s have a robust public examination of that problem and discuss constructive approaches to it. But let’s not just allow the state to build a bigger and bigger empire of unaccountable school spending on the backs of those families by waving around transparently bogus suggestions that serving breakfast raises test scores. It’s noteworthy that the state has set such specific targets for increased meal-related largesse. Clearly, the people who wrote the plan want to make sure that these are not just vague sentiments. They want to make sure spending is actually increased by large amounts.
Even those few aspects of the state system that are germane to its alleged Goals are sometimes moved in the wrong direction by the ESSA plan. The statewide A-F school-grading system remains, but is no longer closely tied to test scores. Instead, state bureaucrats will invent a complex formula to grade schools based on many factors. That’s not a recipe for a strong grading system; it’s an invitation to grade manipulation and watered-down standards. Ironically, just as school grades are being decoupled from test scores, the state’s testing system has been greatly improved. Students are now taking fewer and better tests, both of which represent an improvement. The new tests are based on independent “norm-referenced” standards that can’t be manipulated or watered down by politicians, and can be used to compare Oklahoma students directly to the rest of the nation. Requiring all high school students to take the SAT or ACT, in lieu of the seven—yes, seven—annual state tests they used to take, is a vast improvement. This total disconnect between the plan’s Goals and Initiatives demonstrates a deep contempt for the ESSA reformers in Washington. It shows that the people who wrote the Oklahoma plan know that they will never be held responsible for meeting the Goals. And they don’t care who knows they know. All this indictment of the Old Guard, for putting their own voracious desire for money and power ahead of real educational reform, is also an indictment of the New Guard. The professional education reformers, frustrated by decades of limited results from state activism, got impatient and decided to take a shortcut to power through Washington, D.C. But the Constitution’s federalist system, and the striking Left/Right political coalition suspicious of federal meddling in schools, really will not allow Washington to exercise the level of control the reformers want. The end result is this ridiculous dance where Oklahoma has to submit a 218-page “eight-year strategic plan” for change and reform … under which it will continue to do the same thing it has done for decades: dump truckloads of money into expensive programs with no proven or even probable relationship to education outcomes. Which is exactly what the professional reformers have spent decades trying to stop the system from doing. Welcome to Wonderland. I say these things repentantly. In 2002, I was among those who hoped for good things from ESSA’s forerunner, the No Child Left Behind Act. I said at the time: as long as the federal government throws huge amounts of money at schools anyway, why not get something in return? While that law did include some constructive elements (increased transparency in state reporting of data, for example), it was on the whole a failure, for reasons that
www.ocpathink.org
13
Most Oklahoma Students Lack Proficiency “With new test score standards that state education officials believe are more in line with national standards, the majority of Oklahoma students lack proficiency in all but one subject area tested,” Ben Felder reported October 12 in The Oklahoman. “Most Oklahoma students lack the basic subject-level knowledge the state now requires, according to the statewide scores released Wednesday.” With taxpayers spending $9,781 per-pupil annually to get results like this, it's no wonder two in three Oklahomans say they're not getting a good return on their investment in public education (bit.ly/ OklaEdChoiceSurvey2017). —Brandon Dutcher
Union
Tulsa
Sperry
Skiatook
Sapulpa
Sand Springs
Oswasso
Oologah-Talala
Liberty
Jenks
Glenpool
Coweta
Collinsville
Claremore
Broken Arrow
Bixby
Berryhill
Bartlesville
STATE AVG
2017 TULSA-AREA STUDENT PROFICIENCY RATES
have been clear for years now. ESSA is an attempt to avoid learning the obvious lessons. Personally, I think the New Guard also fails in deeper ways that are visible in the Goals. An excessive focus on quantitative outcomes (test scores, graduation rates) has displaced the wider set of goals that parents generally favor for their children—wisdom, character formation, good citizenship. Faddish notions like an individual career plan for every student reveal the federal reformers’ superficial and materialistic ideas of what education is for. Widespread opposition to accountability reforms arises not only from anger over Washington interference but also from a sense that children are being reduced to interchangeable widgets by small-minded people to whom schools are essentially factories, manufacturing docile workers for big corporations. One thing is clear, though—whatever goals we set for education, there should be a clear connection between our goals and our actions. For two generations, the Old Guard has pledged allegiance to academic outcomes while diverting more and more spending to programs that have no visible effect on those outcomes. The New Guard, far from pulling the school system’s actions back into alignment with its professed goals, has created a system in Washington that only drives schools’ goals and actions further apart.
3rd grade ELA
39 51 46 73 45 49 46 49 48 47 31 50 58 41 40 56 56 20 31
3rd grade math
44 59 53 74 50 47 47 53 49 50 14 61 62 50 42 68 45 23 38
4th grade ELA
37 48 53 65 44 41 41 43 43 51 31 69 60 49 38 35 45 20 29
4th grade math
41 52 39 70 50 41 38 38 57 59 28 64 60 49 39 40 50 18 35
5th grade ELA
40 48 37 65 46 49 41 42 45 49 32 60 62 44 45 54 46 24 33
5th grade math
35 52 21 60 36 33 29 35 41 46 24 54 60 42 34 61 38 17 36
5th grade science
43 54 45 63 44 37 61 51 58 49 24 53 61 52 40 47 59 23 38
6th grade ELA
40 41 52 68 39 41 40 48 36 56 21 44 56 34 43 48 49 29 33
6th grade math
35 52 39 69 30 39 42 38 36 50 29 37 51 34 41 46 29 23 32
7th grade ELA
34 42 46 50 31 35 46 35 40 39 34 40 48 35 31 35 30 20 27
7th grade math
34 56 47 67 29 40 45 35 38 45 16 42 57 46 33 41 28 20 26
8th grade ELA
35 44 48 64 38 40 37 33 29 49 22 39 53 35 31 30 22 20 31
8th grade math
23 37 35 55 20 29 26 22 19 33
8th grade science
41 52 68 73 42 43 50 33 47 52 38 42 63 50 28 45 34 24 43
10th grade ELA
36 51 54 65 29 29 41 33 21 44 18 41 41 34 36 45 33 27 35
books, including John Locke’s Politics of Moral
10th grade history
51 73 65 75 39 59 67 46 50 57 40 69 63 50 42 54 84 31 47
the co-editor of four books, including John Rawls
10th grade math
26 39 39 52 18 30 38 24 26 36 13 36 31 29 30 25 28 19 31
9 29 41 15 21 15 16 11 31 Greg Forster (Ph.D., Yale University) is a Friedman Fellow with EdChoice. He is the author of six Consensus (Cambridge University Press, 2005), and and Christian Social Engagement: Justice as Unfairness. He has written numerous articles in peerreviewed academic journals as well as in popular
Sources: Oklahoma Department of Education; Tulsa World
publications such as The Washington Post and the Chronicle of Higher Education.
14
PERSPECTIVE // December 2017
@OCPAthink 1
OCPA president Jonathan Small (left) chats with author and radio talk show host Dennis Prager at the OCPA Liberty Gala on October 19 in Tulsa.
2
State Sen. Nathan Dahm (R-Broken Arrow) snaps a photo of state Sen. James Leewright (R-Bristow), Dennis Prager, and Cari Leewright.
3
Oklahoma State Board of Education member Dan Keating (left) enjoys a lighthearted moment with OCPA trustee John Brock.
4
Republican state Sen. Julie Daniels of Bartlesville (left) chats with Cari Leewright at the OCPA Liberty Gala.
5
State Sen. Marty Quinn (R-Claremore), Samantha Davidson, and Dee DeLapp chat prior to the 2017 Liberty Gala.
6
Tom Gray (left) chats with state Sen. Micheal Bergstrom (R-Adair) at OCPA's 2017 Liberty Gala.
7
Cathy Costello, Megan Winburn, and Holly Gerard are pictured here at the OCPA Liberty Gala.
1
2 3
4
5
6
7 www.ocpathink.org
15
QUOTE UNQUOTE “I teach my students that concentrated
“If our journalists are perceived as biased or if they engage in editorializing
wealth multiplies poverty.”
on social media, that can undercut the credibility of the entire newsroom...Our
Aaron Baker, a history teacher in the Mid-Del school district who describes himself as a “proud liberal progressive public school teacher” promoting “radical social justice in Oklahoma public schools”
journalists should be especially mindful of appearing to take sides on issues that the Times is seeking to cover objectively.” The New York Times, in an October 13 memo spelling out new social media guidelines for its reporters
“$238,728” Total annual compensation of Tulsa Union superintendent Kirtis Hartzler
“What passes for news today is speculation and advocacy, wishful thinking and self-fashioning, mindless jabber and affirmations of virtue, removed from objective reality and common sense.” Matthew Continetti, editor in chief of the Washington Free Beacon, in a recent column headlined “Pop Goes the Liberal Media Bubble”
“Our teachers, principals, and central office leaders have been working together through a transformational mindset shift away from ‘punishing’ students toward helping students develop discipline and self-control.” Oklahoma City school superintendent Aurora Lora, responding in The Oklahoman to the results of a recent teacher union survey which showed that disruptive behavior continues to plague the school district. “Student behavior seems to be getting worse because there is no way to discipline them,” one surveyed teacher said. “Suspension is highly discouraged. There is no way to discipline, and the kids know it.”
“Ask a Democrat you know one question: ‘What would prevent more shootings—–———more gun laws or more fathers?’” Dennis Prager