I try to keep a good frame of mind when it comes to government.
Is it too big? Yes. Is it wasteful? Yes. But even though it would be easy to jump on the anti-government bandwagon, it wouldn’t be very helpful. I recognize the necessity of government and the many good things it accomplishes, not the least of which we were again reminded of this Memorial Day and every day we safely live our lives.
But when you see things like these it just makes you cringe. Worse, they are right here in my home state of Ohio. I understand why and how but I don’t, you know what I mean?
1. Ohio Governor’s Mansion Sting operation. No, it’s not about getting Ted Strickland taking bag money from the mob. It was to catch inmates working at the mansion smuggling contraband – smokes – back to their prison home. Not exactly much of a crime to most but illegal nonetheless.
But that’s not the big deal. At issue is who canceled the sting and why. And why was a non-official warned about the sting? Was there also an idea proffered by someone in this cast of state characters that would have set the stage to get another state official into trouble?
The state now has its third public safety director in nine months and a bill to eliminate the inmate-work program at the governor’s house is being considered. The bill started out with simply stricter restrictions. But then the governor suspended the program when an inmate working there was found with a blood-alcohol level more than three times at which someone is considered to be drunk.
Why, yes, the Keystone Cops do come to mind.
2. Then there is the state’s child-obesity bill. This is about something that’s important – maintaining a good body weight. The bill would require 30 minutes of exercise daily in addition to recess, among other provisions.
Good ideas but, frankly, is this not something that could be handled at home? And whether food provided at school is healthful could certainly be decided by the local school board, school cooks and parents.
But it doesn’t end there. According to a Dispatch article Sunday, school groups and teachers’ unions oppose the exercise requirement, blaming costs and time. There are only 24 hours a day so the time concern sounds legitimate. A mandatory exercise time means something else cannot be accomplished. But how much can it cost to let kids run around for a half-hour?
The response by one of the co-sponsors of the bill to the objections didn’t help. According to the Dispatch, he replied:
“I don’t understand why the teachers unions think it’s advantageous to have our kids fat and lazy.”
My guess is, despite their objections to the bill, they don’t, really.
3. The Columbus Public School District wants to eliminate most of its bus routes to save money.
You guessed it. That’s not the most intriguing part of the story, all the other issues, such as safety, convenience, notwithstanding. You see, the low bidder on the proposal — the one that would save the district the most money — picked by the district’s superintendent, didn’t sit well with the school board majority.
Apparently the problem is that the bidder is not designated a “Local and Economically Disadvantaged Enterprise.” And since the chosen bid was so good, the superintendent went with a single company instead of splitting the contract, as has been done in the past. Thus, there isn’t also an LEDE alongside the non-LEDE.
As one LEDE owner said to the board:
“I’m saying how is it that we are able to bid solely on the basis of price?” Richard Crockett, Capital’s owner, asked the board.
Leaving aside for the moment the advantages of helping small businesses and that price isn’t necessarily the only factor in choosing a bid, that’s quite a statement considering the reason the school district is making this change in bus routes: to save money.
And why was the LEDE program created?
“The LEDE program was born of an effort to appease minority contractors who threatened to oppose the 2002 bond levy. The initial program provided ways for contractors to prove they were disadvantaged, but minorities and women were automatically considered disadvantaged as long as their net worth was less than $750,000.
“The board altered the program in 2004 to eliminate any goals based on race or gender after a contractor trade group threatened to sue, citing federal case law that racial set-aside programs are unconstitutional.”
4. Ohio takes another shot at the Race To The Top, one of the federal government’s latest efforts to bolster education. The program is in its infancy but both sides of the political philosophical spectrum have had positive things to say about the proposal. One aspect of it that has garnered support is its rigorous application process, and that’s where we run into problems.
Only two states received funds in the first round. One reason why they got money and the 38 other states, including Ohio, didn’t is that they got 100 percent buy-in from all the schools in their states. That is, the superintendents, school boards and teachers’ unions all signed agreements to participate.
Think about that for a moment. What is the one refrain we always hear about education? “We need more money.” Let’s assume that’s true. Why, then, turn down the chance to get more money? Often it’s the unions who do not agree to the idea of tying together teacher performance and student progress. While there are problems with this, it’s not completely unreasonable.
The first time around, Ohio could only muster 51 percent buy-in. But, “following heavy lobbying by Gov. Ted Strickland and state educators to get more schools involved,” that number … soared to … 57 percent. Let’s face it. That’s pretty sad.
Oh, Ohio’s chances are better this time if only because fewer states will be competing. And, Ohio’s application ballooned to 378 pages, 116 pages more than last time. That must be good, right? But as Frederick Hess noted regarding the first round of applications:
The Department of Education asked states to document everything in their proposals and issued guidelines that applications should total no more than 350 pages. The result? Every state exceeded the guidelines, with no consequences. States padded their applications with hundreds of pages of letters of support, research papers, jargon-laden memos, and curricula. New York, for instance, included 156 pages of letters of support. It’s not clear whether states whose consultants produced less voluminous applications were penalized for their failure.
Not sure what’s worse. That every state acted like an obnoxious overachiever who hands in a report that far exceeds the maximum length. Or that the federal government didn’t reject the proposals because they exceeded the guidelines.
Oh well. Maybe this time it will work out for Ohio.
