Month: September 2014

“Town Wants to Ban Cameras After Cop’s Obama Rant Goes
Viral (Nanny of the Month, Sept. 2014)” is the latest
video from ReasonTV. Watch above or click on the link below for
video, full text, supporting links, downloadable versions, and more
ReasonTV clips.

View this article.

Common Core critics contend that national
education standards will erode local decision-making on school
issues while promoting a national curriculum of sorts. Most Core
proponents generally dismiss these concerns as unfounded.

But Bill Gates, a major financial backer of the standards, was
atypically direct about what peddlers of standardization are trying
to accomplish during a
Politico event on Monday. Rather than defend Common Core
from accusations of creeping nationalization, he finally confirmed
that yes, this is exactly what Core proponents are trying to
accomplish—less local autonomy is a good thing, as he
says in the video:

“Common Core I would have thought of as more of a technocratic
issue. The basic idea of, ‘should we share an electrical plug
across the country?’ Well, you can get partisan about that I
suppose. Should Georgia have a different railroad width than
everybody else? Should they teach multiplication in a different
way? Oh that’s brilliant [sarcasm], who came up with that idea?
Common Core, the idea that what you should know at various grades,
that that should be well-structured and you should really insist on
kids knowing something so you can build on it, I did not really
expect that to become a big political issue.”

There you have it. Gates views the education system—the many
myriad ways Americans could pass on knowledge to their children—as
akin to choosing the correct railroad track size. The implication
is obvious: after all, there is only one right railroad track size!
Similarly, there is only one correct way to teach children, and all
children must be taught that way, according to Gates.

This way of thinking goes against
everything the reform movement has come to understand over the
last few decades about what works in schools: greater
standardization is not the answer; schools languish
under stifling centralization; every kid is unique and has
different educational needs; and local authorities—especially
parents—are best suited to the task of plotting their children’s
educational paths. 

Nurturing the mind of a child is an infinitely more complex task
than choosing an electrical plug. It’s not as simple as plugging
the right cord into a child’s brain and flipping a switch.

Gates says that Georgia shouldn’t teach multiplication a
different way than the rest of the country. But what if there is a
style or method that works in Georgia but not New York? What if
Georgia discovers a better way? 

And even if it were true that all U.S. student should be
learning the exact same thing in the exact same way,
no reasonable person could be persuaded that Common Core is it.
That’s because scant evidence exists in Common Core’s favor—backers
are relying on little more than their faith in an unproven
methodology.

Standardization isn’t good, and these specific standards aren’t
good (or at least, there isn’t a lot of evidence in their favor).
Which side in this debate is being unreasonably ideological,
again?

Common Core critics contend that national
education standards will erode local decision-making on school
issues while promoting a national curriculum of sorts. Most Core
proponents generally dismiss these concerns as unfounded.

But Bill Gates, a major financial backer of the standards, was
atypically direct about what peddlers of standardization are trying
to accomplish during a
Politico event on Monday. Rather than defend Common Core
from accusations of creeping nationalization, he finally confirmed
that yes, this is exactly what Core proponents are trying to
accomplish—less local autonomy is a good thing, as he
says in the video:

“Common Core I would have thought of as more of a technocratic
issue. The basic idea of, ‘should we share an electrical plug
across the country?’ Well, you can get partisan about that I
suppose. Should Georgia have a different railroad width than
everybody else? Should they teach multiplication in a different
way? Oh that’s brilliant [sarcasm], who came up with that idea?
Common Core, the idea that what you should know at various grades,
that that should be well-structured and you should really insist on
kids knowing something so you can build on it, I did not really
expect that to become a big political issue.”

There you have it. Gates views the education system—the many
myriad ways Americans could pass on knowledge to their children—as
akin to choosing the correct railroad track size. The implication
is obvious: after all, there is only one right railroad track size!
Similarly, there is only one correct way to teach children, and all
children must be taught that way, according to Gates.

This way of thinking goes against
everything the reform movement has come to understand over the
last few decades about what works in schools: greater
standardization is not the answer; schools languish
under stifling centralization; every kid is unique and has
different educational needs; and local authorities—especially
parents—are best suited to the task of plotting their children’s
educational paths. 

Nurturing the mind of a child is an infinitely more complex task
than choosing an electrical plug. It’s not as simple as plugging
the right cord into a child’s brain and flipping a switch.

Gates says that Georgia shouldn’t teach multiplication a
different way than the rest of the country. But what if there is a
style or method that works in Georgia but not New York? What if
Georgia discovers a better way? 

And even if it were true that all U.S. student should be
learning the exact same thing in the exact same way,
no reasonable person could be persuaded that Common Core is it.
That’s because scant evidence exists in Common Core’s favor—backers
are relying on little more than their faith in an unproven
methodology.

Standardization isn’t good, and these specific standards aren’t
good (or at least, there isn’t a lot of evidence in their favor).
Which side in this debate is being unreasonably ideological,
again?

Elizabeth Warren voted against funding the Export-Import Bank a
few weeks ago. But is that because she wants to live up to her reputation as a crusader against
crony capitalism or “socialism for the rich” as she calls it? Not
really, I note in the USA Today.

Warren voted against the funding because it was attached to a
bill to fund Syrian rebels. Otherwise, she’s a big fan of the bank,
which, she insists, “helps create American jobs and spur economic
growth.”

 But both those claims are laughable. So why is Warren, the
female Robin Hood, so readily abandoning her pet cause (and making
a liar and a fool of herself
again)?

It’s because, as former Democratic Massachusetts Congressman
Barney Frank
told the Huffington Post, Democrats have made a
tactical decision to close ranks and dump their previous opposition
to Ex-Im. Why? Because they want to wrest Corporate America — and
presumably its campaign contributions — from the GOP.

In other words, it appears the woman who went to Washington to
vanquish the corporate powers-that-be has become a classic
Washington insider serving those powers.

Go
here to view the whole thing.

Could the Netflix model work in
health care? A doctor’s office in Rochester, New York is aiming to
find out. Good MD, a primary care office set up this year, charges
patients a single, flat monthly fee for unlimited visits. Monthly
charges are based on age, and extra services—whether stitches or
strep throat tests—are provided for an additional fee, posted
online and in the office. The practice doesn’t accept private
insurance at all.

The result is a system that benefits not third-party payers, but
doctors and patients, Good MD Founder Dr. Thuc
Huynh, told local TV station WROC. “Insurance isn’t who
reimburses me or dictates what we do together in terms of our
treatment. So, it’s a direct financial relationship.”

This is what the future of health care reform could look like:
It’s provider-driven. It’s consumer-focused, with an emphasis on
both price and service. And it’s happening at the margins—at a
single practice, in a single town.

As Obamacare’s has settled into place, the Republican party’s
promises to repeal and replace the law have stagnated. The law is
still unpopular, but the coverage expansion has made the already
difficult prospect of repeal harder than ever, and despite years of
promises, no obvious replacement plan has emerged. Obamacare’s
critics in Congress are still opposed to the law, but increasingly
seem unsure about what to do instead.

Senior Editor Peter Suderman writes that provider-driven
experiments like what’s happening at Good MD could help point to a
different way of thinking about the problem.

View this article.