Former Senator Wendell Ford is campaigning with Jack Conway today. 9:00 at Shoney’s in Frankfort. 1:45 at Gillum’s in Richmond. 3:30 at the Teamsters Hall in Lexington. [Media Advisory]
When I mention something – like poll numbers – and then link to them, I get emails from station management about copyright. But then station reporters publish entire pieces from various political sites without linking back and it’s a-okay. Interesting how that game works. [WHAS11]
Greg Fischer’s lead is shrinking and Chris Thieneman is losing super-hard in Louisville. Looks like Hal Heiner – at 63 percent – has a huge shot to become Louisville’s first Republican mayor in a long time. [The 'Ville Voice]
Jack Conway is confident on the last leg of his U.S. Senate campaign. [Amanda Van Benschoten]
Mitch McConnell has a lock on the GOP to maintain his Republican leadership position in the U.S. Senate. [National Journal]
Joe reminded us of all the extended footage of Rand Paul on Alex Jones’ crazy radio show. In addition to what’s in the latest anti-Rand ad I shared with you last night. [Barefoot & Progressive]
The Mongiardo campaign took to Daily Kos to spread that mountaintop removal video of Jack Conway. And they said nice things about Page One. HEADSPLOSIONS!!!!!!!!!! [Daily Kos]
Our education commissioner doesn’t realize that a deal has already been made. [H-L]
It should be clear to him because the Courier-Journal editorial board is pushing the anti-charter schools movement. Mostly on behalf of the JCTA. [C-J]
There’s no “may” to it – state workers will take the brunt of the budget heat. [State Journal]
18 responses so far ↓
1 Strangeite // May 14, 2010 at 7:55 am
Come on over. We have cookies.
I decided last week to bite the bullet and vote for Mongiardo and ever since I have felt good.
2 Jinx // May 14, 2010 at 8:19 am
Jake, you’re just realizing that people like your blog even if they disagree with you on some subjects?
3 Novena // May 14, 2010 at 8:37 am
“When Zero Counts for Something”
Sen. Dolittle: “Of course, we want to keep Mitch. He’s our Party standard-bearer, the symbol of Do-Nothing.”
Sen. Nadaman: “I take it that he will continue to carry our water in an empty pail?”
Sen. Zeropew: “It would be a miracle if the GOP sought to do anything else.”
4 Wake Up Call // May 14, 2010 at 8:41 am
Since the MSM seem a bit slow on the uptake and have made no effort to learn anything about Rand Paul, I thought I’d help. He is a 40 year younger version of Gurley Martin, but with his daddy’s connections. Rand is just a regular ol’ Kentuckian like us with a 1/2 million $$ house and a daddy who is a member of Congress. We can also summarize his endorsements – a congressman for life (his daddy), a former governor who found governing one of the smallest states in the country too hard (Sarah Palin), an incumbent who couldn’t raise enough money to run for reelection (Jim Bunning), and a conspiracy loving, truther radio host (Alex Jones). I can see why the media wouldn’t take the time to explore his background and supporters in any detail.
5 RHines // May 14, 2010 at 10:02 am
It’s true, Jake, local television news is the biggest rip-off-ers of them all.
They just can’t wait for the morning newspaper to hit the streets so they can re-write the copy and claim that it’s their own.
6 starrymessenger // May 14, 2010 at 10:41 am
Wake Up Call forgot jim demint, the guy who
will take mcconnell to task over what he did
to bunning should jack conway be the next
senator. mcconnell has to placate trey and
respect rand’s primary win, as he keeps the
general election on a g.o.p gameplan. the hint
is, despite eliot spitzer not dating her at all,
ms. kagan goes to the high court as mitch is
distracted. i feel that at 7 a.m on the 18th we
will see trey gain 5 pts in the polls. trey will be
late, trey will have to sot back and put a good
face on things, and then COUNT the landslide
votes! trey may be one of life’s opitimists.
sometimes it helps to be a governor before
one is a senator or a president. trey is young.
7 eric schansberg // May 14, 2010 at 12:48 pm
That C-J’s anti-charter school editorial was an above-average mess. I was thinking about copying my blog entry on it to your site. But then I might have to sue myself over copyright or something…
8 Novena // May 14, 2010 at 1:15 pm
“Charters Are for the Birds”
Most all research shows that charter schools tend to be no better, and often worse, than traditional public schools. The addition of for-profit firms usually helps only those corporations themselves. Another example of free marketers doing nothing better–and typically getting fired once the public catches on to their ways.
9 eric schansberg // May 14, 2010 at 1:22 pm
The research has mixed results on quality– and difficult to conduct, since you’re measuring cohorts (who self-select) vs. aggregates.
But even if quality is the same, why not allow more choice, flexibility, etc.?
The editorial is incoherent, for one thing, since it applauds some choice but then denigrates choice in charters.
10 Novena // May 14, 2010 at 2:37 pm
“Eric, Charters Are Still for the Birds”
The big national study on charter schools vs. regular public schools (by Margaret Raymond, an economist funded by pro-charter groups, no less) found: 17% of charters got higher test scores; 46% made no difference; and 37% of charters fared significantly worse than traditional public schools. That result could lean even more in favor of regular public schools if one considers these factors: (1) charters have far fewer students with disabilities and English-language limitations; (2) charters can weed out weaker students; and (3) charters often have high attrition rates (50%-60%). We should not overly experiment with kids’ lives.
11 eric schansberg // May 14, 2010 at 3:30 pm
“The” big study? ;-)
I’m not an expert in that literature, but I know there are a number of “big studies” on this topic.
That said, your three points are well-taken. But the big factor against charter schools– when empirical work is sloppy– is that charter schools tend to locate in poorer-performing areas. If all of these are not carefully held constant statistically– and this is very difficult to do well– you’ll draw squirrelly inferences from impressive-looking studies.
__________
So, we shouldn’t let parents have more choices– to “experiment” with their own children?
If the parents are generally happy (and what do the studies [always?] say about that?) and it’s no more expensive (if anything less expensive), then what’s the big deal?
And maybe we should take away private and home schooling experiments as well?
___________
I don’t see the C-J concerned with such things when it comes to magnet, neighborhood, or traditional schools. And we certainly don’t see the C-J concerned with educational quality or efficiency when it comes to their diversity plans.
__________
This is not a liberal/conservative issue. Only statists and unionists avidly support the government’s monopoly power– especially over the poor and middle class– for its own sake.
12 Novena // May 14, 2010 at 4:12 pm
“Facts vs. Opinion on Charters”
Eric, I respect your calm, rational approach to the topic. Yet, as Daniel Moynihan once put it, “You are entitled to your opinion, but not to the facts.” The latter speak for themselves. The cited study is by far the largest ever done on charter vs. regular public schools–and the comparison result is enormously in favor of regular public schools. That is a fact, not an opinion.
13 Novena // May 14, 2010 at 4:27 pm
“Let’s Play ‘Monopoly’ in the USA”
Addendum to my last comment: Eric, you were rather rational except for the ad hominem remarks about “statism,” “unionism” and “monopolies.” Others might argue that the South, in particular, would likely be better off with more concerted union efforts (to help the poor and middle class). And government is often needed in many worthwhile ways (public education being one that comes to mind among a multitude). Indeed, the private sector seems to have the real monopoly on monopolies, e.g., check the few major banks that control about 70% of our wealth and the big few insurance companies in control of the health-car industry that bleeds us daily and is the largest source of US bankruptcies.
14 eric schansberg // May 14, 2010 at 10:08 pm
Raymond’s study is large and impressive given its limitations– but is also within a broad literature (with generally positive results for charters) trying to deal with a difficult-to-measure outcome. Looking at Raymond alone– or seeing it as the study to end all studies– is inappropriate.
Here’s Jay Greene on this:
Critics are clinging to a study by Margaret Raymond at CREDO, which shows more mixed results. While that study has the benefit of covering 15 states and DC, it can’t correct for the self-selection of students into charter schools like the highest quality studies linked above. On average, students appear to be drawn to switching to charter schools because they are having trouble in their traditional public school. Simply controlling for those students’ prior achievement and other observed demographic factors doesn’t quite correct for whatever negative factors may have caused students to switch to charters and that may continue to hinder their academic progress. The CREDO study is as good as it can be given its approach, but I would have greater confidence in the consistent findings from several studies in different locations that do control for self-selection into charter schools.
http://jaypgreene.com/tag/margaret-raymond/
15 eric schansberg // May 14, 2010 at 10:11 pm
Novena, you didn’t deal with any of my other points except a semi-tangent on private-sector monopoly power and labor market cartels.
In particular, I’m wondering if you have further thoughts on the extent to which parents should be allowed to experiment on their kids with education.
And I’m wondering why you would be critical of some monopoly power in the private sector (often enhanced by government policy), but completely unconcerned with far more monopoly power in the provision of K-12 education.
16 eric schansberg // May 14, 2010 at 10:25 pm
And let’s assume that “the government” needs to be involved in K-12 education. There’s still the question of federalism/decentralization– the extent to which dollars and regs should be local, state, and/or federal.
And there’s the question of the extent of privatization within that provision. (For example, should the government allow private schooling at all? For example, in one or more European countries, homeschooling is illegal.)
Consider this example: Many people believe that the government needs to be involved in helping poor people get food. So, we have “food stamps” with some regs on what poor people can buy with those resources, but other than that, they’re free to use them at the private grocery store of their choice.
We could do it quite differently– for example, having the government produce food, run grocery stores, and then have the poor only able to shop at the grocery store in their neighborhood. That’s how the government does K-12 education.
Why not use “education stamps”– or at least, a wide variety of choice– and free poor people from an oppressive system? (Or maybe we should improve our food to the poor system by having the government run the whole thing?)
17 eric schansberg // May 17, 2010 at 4:35 pm
One more for the pile:
EDIT — Don’t comment with just some random link without approval.
18 eric schansberg // May 17, 2010 at 9:50 pm
Sorry…I didn’t know that you don’t allow links. (The link was not at all random; it was an essay discussing a study of charter schools and the “freedom” with which they’re allowed to operate. People can go to my blog to catch the link if they’re interested.)
Leave a Comment