Tag Archives: ethics

A Couple of Test Outcomes

Posted on by
Reply

…illustrate the problem.

Since schools across the US first closed last spring, sending about 50 million children to learn remotely, one looming question for educators, parents and children has been: how much has learning suffered?
Data from two national testing programs, Renaissance Learning Inc and NWEA, which are used widely by US public schools to assess students’ progress, show widespread performance declines at the start of this academic year, particularly in math.

These are the outcomes. The teachers unions don’t care, though. They don’t want their teachers to return to the classroom unless and until union leadership can be guaranteed absolute freedom from the risk of Wuhan Virus infection. Which is, of course, a deliberately impossible criterion.

GIGO

Posted on by
Reply

The Garbage Out is easily summarized: the Progressive-Democrats’ $1.9 trillion Wuhan Virus “relief” bill that the House is putting its finishing touch on and then will send to the Senate.

The garbage going in:

  • $350 billion for state and local governments, cities, and counties. Progressive-Democrats also changed the funding formula to ensure most of the dollars go to blue states that shutdown their State economies—to the detriment of neighboring States as well as to their own
  • $86 billion to bail out 185 or so multiemployer pension plans insured by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. Never mind that these so-called plans have been badly underfunded since their inception by both the employers and the unions that created them
  • $129 billion for elementary and secondary schools, whether they reopen for classroom learning or not. Never mind, either, that most of the funds allocated by CARES remains unspent—or that of these new $129 billion isn’t scheduled to be spent until years later

And this garbage:

  • $50 billion for the Federal Emergency Management Agency
  • $39 billion for child care
  • $30 billion for public transit agencies
  • $19 billion in rental assistance
  • $10 billion in mortgage help
  • $4.5 billion for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance program
  • $3.5 billion for the program formerly known as food stamps
  • $1 billion for Head Start
  • $1.5 billion for Amtrak
  • $4 billion to pay off loans of “socially disadvantaged” farmers and ranchers
  • nearly $1 billion in world food assistance.

Never mind that of these $162.5 billoin, only the FEMA money might have utility. The rest of it is utterly unnecessary for anything other than vote-buying. The “needs” implied here would disappear were the States to reopen their economies and the Federal government to get out of the way so businesses could operate and Americans go back to work.

And this raw sewage:

  • $15 an hour minimum wage

Never mind the business- and job-destroying (to the tune of 1.4 million jobs) nature of such a mandate.

  • an increase to the child tax credit to $3,000 from $2,000 ($99 billion)
  • expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit to certain additional childless adults ($25 billion)

Which wouldn’t be necessary were Government out of the way and our State and national economy reopened.

Even earmarks:

  • $1.5 million for the Seaway International Bridge connecting New York to Canada
  • nearly $500 million for, as the CBO puts it, “grants to fund activities related to the arts, humanities, libraries and museums, and Native American language preservation.”

But this is what the Progressive-Democrats are demanding. Watch Senators Joe Manchin (D, WV) and Kyrsten Sinema (D, AZ) vote these up because they’ll vote up the overall $1.9 trillion bill, along nakedly partisan reconciliation, for all their pious sermons about requiring bipartisanship on all bills.

A Proposed Response

Posted on by
Reply

Texas State Congressman Matt Shaheen (R, Dist 66 [which includes my county]) has tweeted access to a Request for Comment regarding last week’s snow and cold storm with various utilities’ associated failures to keep supplies of electricity, natural gas, and potable water flowing in major areas of the State.

Kudos to Shaheen for publicizing this RFP.

Below are my inputs.

  1. All, without exception, ERCOT board members and senior executives (C-suite equivalents and their deputies) must reside within Texas. Half of the board members, a separate half of the C-suite, and a separate half of their deputies must reside in separate rural regions of Texas. Within that last, a C-suite executive and his deputy must not reside in the same region.
  2. Each of these board members, senior executives, and their deputies must have demonstrated expertise and empirical experience in energy and potable water supply—e., they must be energy and water engineers. Personnel with legal expertise can serve as board consultants and as assistants to the senior executives’ deputies.
  3. The State government must encourage—but not mandate—all utility providers to amortize their bills that result from the sort of event the storm of 15-19 Feb 21 represents over the succeeding 12 months. Single bills of $9,000-$17,000 (to the extent these numbers aren’t just press hype) shouldn’t occur; they should be spread over the succeeding year.
  4. Exceptionally high single-month bills like those suggested in 3) above should be investigated for their legitimacy—but from the going-in assumption that they are legitimate free-market, high demand/limited supply prices. “Price gouging” is what must be proven.
  5. All utility providers and their suppliers must winterize their systems against worst-case scenarios, with the minimum threshold being a 100-year temperature excursion, sustained for more than “a few” hours. The current winterizing was against only “bad” case scenarios. This winterizing must come solely at the expense of the individual utility, that utility’s customers, and each utility’s supplier(s). The costs should be amortizable over a reasonable period of time, and PUCT should allow the rate increases needed for cost recovery within that amortization schedule for those utilities within its jurisdiction. Other regulators must be required to do the same. The amortization schedules should be those initially proposed by the utilities/suppliers, and the regulators should be spring-loaded to accept them, rejecting a particular schedule only for concrete, measurable cause(s).
  6. Utilities with out-of-state suppliers that can’t or won’t comply with 5) above should be encouraged to find Texas-domiciled suppliers with which to replace them. Failure to find substitutes should not absolve the impacted utility of its responsibilities or liabilities related to energy/water supply so long as they are making concrete, measurable, publicly viewable ongoing efforts to find Texas-domiciled replacements. The Texas government should support the search efforts with its own research facilities, but not with taxpayer funds.
  7. Eliminate energy subsidies—both renewable and hydrocarbon

Some Questions

Posted on by
Reply

…I have.

As the coronavirus raged across Boston over the holiday season, the medical director for the city’s [Boston’s] Public Health Commission was working 5,000 miles away in Hawaii.
Dr Jennifer Lo acknowledged this past week that city officials gave her permission to re-locate her family to Hawaii last November so she could care for her elderly parents. She plans to return to Boston this summer.

Lo is a contractor, not a city employee, and so not subject to the city’s you-gotta-live-here requirement, but that doesn’t mean her Medical Director duties didn’t need to be met in situ. Those are city needs, not phone ’em in tasks.

Thus, I have questions.

Why couldn’t her husband, alone or accompanied by the rest of her family, relocate to Hawaii to care for both sets of elderly parents?

If her parents were in such dire need, how is it that she can return to Boston so soon—and by coincidence, in Boston’s summer weather?

If Lo were serious about her concerns for her ability to honor her city Public Health Commission duties from Hawaii, why didn’t she go ahead and resign instead of merely offering to do so and seeing what the Commission would say? Related, had she precoordinated her offer so she knew what the commission would say?

There may well be serious, legitimizing answers, but they aren’t being articulated.

“Working Off” Student Debt

Posted on by
Reply

A letter writer in The Wall Street Journal‘s Tuesday Letters section posited an alternative to student debt: trade it for community service.

I would readily support loan forgiveness if the beneficiary were required to do community service for the forgiven debt.

Only so long as the community service work is low-skill, low-education work, with the student debt scofflaw—because that’s what he still would be—working directly under the controlling supervision of a low-skill, low-education person who’s had that job for a while.

Let the scofflaw see who he’s displacing with his preciousness and his debt-ducking.

Let him see the college student, during the school year, trying to earn some night shift money with which to pay for some college without “borrowing” money.

Let him see the high schooler trying to earn some summer job money and to obtain some initial, entry-level work experience for his future use in working his way up the employment and economic ladders.

On that last, especially, I employed a high school sophomore last summer to mow my lawn, edge it, and clean the sidewalk of the mowing and edging detritus. I ordinarily do my own yard work, but this enterprising young man, by his enterprise, earned the job. A student debt scofflaw would get this sort of work from me only if he worked under the hiring and firing authority of my high school sophomore contractor. Which would give the sophomore some valuable supervisory experience, too.

Which supervisory experience also would benefit those other low-skill, low-education workers for whom the community service debtors would be working.