Articles

Oklahoma voters and parents “emphatically support school choice expansion.” That’s the assessment of respected public-opinion researcher Pat McFerron, president of Cole Hargrave Snodgrass and Associates, after reviewing the results of the firm’s latest survey.

Once each quarter or so, voices from Washington announce how well the American economy is doing. But in reality there are 50 state economies, and what goes on in those 50 state capitol buildings sometimes has a greater effect on local prosperity (or the lack of it) than doings in Washington.

Oklahoma’s higher education system employs far too many non-instructional workers relative to the national average. This bloated workforce drives up the cost of higher education, and a significant share of these costs falls on the shoulders of Oklahoma’s taxpayers.

“I support school choice,” some education policymakers say, “but we need to make sure parents choose good schools!” In order for parents to choose good schools, of course, they need good information. Not information from government bureaucracies—which have a long track record of measuring the wrong things and deceiving parents—but from emerging resources such as Great Schools, Global Report Card, School Grades, and more. Better information, not tighter regulation, is the best way to let parents improve school quality.

Many policymakers—including some in Oklahoma—insist on applying 20th-century accountability constructs to a 21st-century education system, a system which includes vouchers, tax credits, and education savings accounts. But the world is changing, and many analysts are recognizing the need to adapt.

By eliminating some of this unnecessary spending, Oklahoma could pay teachers what they deserve without raising taxes or jeopardizing funding for roads, bridges, public safety, or the social safety net. That’s a better path – one Oklahoma lawmakers should take in the upcoming 2016 legislative session.

When Oklahoma policymakers rely on and accept federal funds knowing some of those funds are borrowed, they violate the spirit of our own state Constitution. They also act against the better judgment of the majority of Oklahomans.

When Oklahoma’s new A-F report cards were released last month, many in the education community were quick to pronounce the grading system “flawed” and “unfair” and to insist that the grades don’t accurately reflect student performance. Tulsa World columnist Jay Cronley noticed the defensiveness and remarked (sensibly, I thought) that “if people focused more on improving themselves and their families than complaining about everything from the headline in the newspaper to the testing procedure, maybe more schools would improve their grades.”

There’s a high cost to massive expansion of federal regulation; a cost that can’t be measured in dollars. Yes, we can measure dollars expended by government, extracted by taxpayers or forgone in lost economic growth. And yes, these costs are high and harmful. But the more difficult to measure cost of this centralization of regulation is the long-term dumbing-down of U.S. public policy.

A long-established principle of property law is that no person has a right to the proceeds of their criminal activity. Yet what if a government official merely suspects, rather than proves, the crime? Does government still get to seize personal property? In Oklahoma today, the answer is yes.