Friday, December 19, 2014
Friday, December 5, 2014
Testimony of Dr. Oran P. Smith: First Steps to School Readiness Study Committee
Thursday, December 4, 2014, 1:00 PM
First, the Education of Young Children is a Family Affair. We believe that the institution of family and its role must be protected. The primary educator of our youngest citizens is the family. Governmental policies should support and defer to the family unit, not by coming with an attitude of “we know better than parents”, undermine or replace the family as educators of pre-kindergarteners.
It has been a nearly ten years now, but I was struck by a very strongly worded op-ed on this matter that appeared in The State newspaper in 2006. The author was Reed Morton, the legendary kicker for the USC football team. I had never seen his views in print before or since. The title of the piece was “Hand Them Over to the State.” His argument was that at the current pace of early childhood education, in 2015 every infant would be taken directly from the hospital in which she was born to the local public school for “early intervention.”
An extreme example, let’s not go down that road. Let’s default to the parent as the primary educator for 0-3 when we can, and work with parents when we can’t.
The Meeting Street Academy in Charleston and Spartanburg founded by George Dean Johnson represents a marvelous example of how parents have become a part of early education, of how home and school can work together.
In all things, family should be encouraged. I realize this may be outside the scope of this committee, but one way to do that might be to help poor families thrive financially. For at least six years, John Rouff of SC Fair Share has been walking these halls attempting to generate interest in a state earned income tax credit. Could an EITC be devised that would help the working poor be better parents? Under certain conditions, now may be the time for an EITC along the lines of the federal version championed by Ronald Reagan.
Second, the Education of Young Children is in SC often a Faith Affair. The church and the church-sponsored school are extensions of the family. Government should protect the church as a private provider---a place where faith can be openly shared and celebrated, as in the family.
This brings me quickly to an adjacent third point, The Education of Young Children in SC Has Represented a Marvelous Experiment in Free Enterprise that We Should Encourage not “Stateize.” If we were referring to a military junta somewhere in South America taking over a private industry it would be called “nationalization.” I am not aware of a word to indicate takeover of an industry or ministry in the private sector by a state government, so I have coined “stateize.”
I urge you to in all cases seek to make private options work. After the family, the state should defer (or default) to private enterprise and the free market. Best practices should be used as models, and the highest level of accountability for public dollars should be non-negotiable, but free enterprise is the reason for South Carolina’s very existence. Free enterprise should be allowed to work in the sphere of the education of young children.
Private sector early childhood providers:
- Allow parents to retain more control over their children’s early years.
- Specialize in early childhood only and do not blend toddlers with much older children.
- They also offer closer monitoring of transportation issues for small children.
- Can usually educate a child for less than the state, all while paying state and local taxes.
- Are allowed to teach from the Bible and offer spiritual instruction, which is vitally important during the early years of a child’s life. Government takeover equals secularization of care.
- Represent hundreds of families who have dedicated their lives to the education of young children. They are an extension of the family.
- Are just that, private. They are small businesses representing the spirit of free enterprise that built this nation.
- Are regulated effectively, unlike unlicensed home day care facilities.
For a preview of what might be on the horizon if we are not vigilant in this area, we need only to look towards Great Britain. Even with that country’s greater tolerance for government intervention, many there are concerned that government-dominated child care has gone too far.
In fact, the (2010) platform for Britain’s Conservative Party states that while they support care for pre-school aged children, they want that care to be “provided by a diverse range of providers – including the many childminders and private, voluntary and independent nurseries which are currently being squeezed out of the system.”
Rather than rolling First Steps into Fort Rutledge, an unwelcome environment for building public-private partnerships, low income families in South Carolina would be better-served if parents were given flexible spending accounts to use for educational and educational therapy-related services for students. Florida and Arizona offer some families accounts such as these and have found high levels of parental satisfaction.[i] Florida’s preschool choice program includes specific academic goals and a provision to remove underperforming providers from participation in the program. Rigorous analyses of programs around the country that offer scholarships for private programs show significant levels of student achievement.[ii]
South Carolina’s goal should be to improve student outcomes and give families flexible, high-quality options to prepare their children to succeed—not simply to willy nilly enroll more young children in classroom settings at earlier ages.
Connected to Choice in Education is my fourth point, that the Education of Young Children Should Not Take a One Size Fits All Approach. Every child should not necessarily go to school at ages 0, 1, 2, or 3. A “universal” pre-school is hardly the logical response in a state that has since 1999 spent $436 million on early education programs, pushing more and more kids into pre-K while seeing 2 out of 3 state 4th graders reading at “Basic” or “Below Basic” levels—levels that indicate students are preforming below the appropriate grade level.[iii]
Research does not indicate that universal pre-k is the answer. We have significant work to do to insure the K-12 education system young children matriculate into is prepared to sustain any gains made amongst certain populations in early childhood. I’m afraid that as of now, we simply can’t say that’s the case.
A one size fits all Universal Money Bomb is not the answer. Justice Kittredge said as much in his dissent in Abbeville et. al. when he wrote that “…five of the eight districts in this litigation are in the top ten school districts in the state in terms of revenues received. Thus, Plaintiff Districts are among the highest funded districts in the state…”We urge you to continue on a path of targeting of funding, insuring that state dollars are sent where they will be used accountably and effectively to promote robust student achievement.
Fifth…and finally, and admittedly this has been touched on by earlier testimony…the Education of Young Children Should Not Be Held Hostage to Arcane, Even Byzantine Education Structure. In the Abbeville decision, Justice Toal writing for the majority said that “…it is striking that the parties to the instant litigation have focused narrowly on a struggle between education expenditures and education outcomes while ignoring the overarching dilemmas emanating from the organizational structure of public education.”[iv]
Palmetto Policy Forum has been on record since its inception about the drag on the system represented by multiple boards with overlapping and even competing responsibilities in education. We are particularly disturbed by a State Board of Education selected by odd-sized Judicial Circuits that rotate amongst the counties within the Circuit thus not democratically representing the families they are meant to serve.
But consider the First Steps to School Readiness Board of Trustees. It has been said that a camel is a horse designed by a committee. The First Steps governance structure surely looked like this progeny. Stakeholders, particularly private providers and business representatives must be at the table. But 39 members was quite large. A reduction to 25 is a great improvement. But a sound option would be to look to the MA, OH and MD models for how to fine tune an agency with a Commission and a CEO.
So, in conclusion, our request of this study committee in its deliberations, can be summarized with four “R’s”: Respect for the Family & Private Providers, a close monitoring of the state’s Return on Investment no matter what the provider, a Ramping Up of Opportunity through more and earlier choices for parents, and a Restructuring of Education Governance.
Thank you for the opportunity to share these thoughts with you.
110 Blatt Building, Columbia, SC
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Good afternoon.
I am Oran Smith, and I come to you
this afternoon in two capacities. I am President & CEO of Palmetto Family,
a faith-based, public policy research organization founded in Spartanburg and based
here in Columbia since 1994. I am also glad to be part of Palmetto Policy
Forum, a new type of policy organization dedicated to expanding opportunity by building
consensus around common sense solutions.
For those of you not familiar with
PPF, you will surely know some of our board members, like Phil Hughes, Van Hipp,
Barry Wynn, and an obscure banker by the name of Brenan. I serve as Senior
Fellow at PPF. Our President and CEO is Ellen Weaver
By way of personal background, I
received my undergraduate degree from Clemson and my Master of Public
Administration and Doctorate from the University of South Carolina. I should
also add that my parents, who are Furman Class of 1954, assure me that they
voted for Dick Riley for Student Body President that year. I came to Columbia from
Greenville with Carroll Campbell to serve in his office of economic development.
My brief thoughts today will be of a
macro or broad perspective. I believe
the principles I outline today enjoy strong, majority support with the public
and certainly on the boards to which I report and will serve to frame parts of
this discussion.
So, what are the “first principles”
that I believe must underlie any sound recommendations for early childhood
education in our state? Here are five
assertions or principles I would like to leave with you:
First, the Education of Young Children is a Family Affair. We believe that the institution of family and its role must be protected. The primary educator of our youngest citizens is the family. Governmental policies should support and defer to the family unit, not by coming with an attitude of “we know better than parents”, undermine or replace the family as educators of pre-kindergarteners.
It has been a nearly ten years now, but I was struck by a very strongly worded op-ed on this matter that appeared in The State newspaper in 2006. The author was Reed Morton, the legendary kicker for the USC football team. I had never seen his views in print before or since. The title of the piece was “Hand Them Over to the State.” His argument was that at the current pace of early childhood education, in 2015 every infant would be taken directly from the hospital in which she was born to the local public school for “early intervention.”
An extreme example, let’s not go down that road. Let’s default to the parent as the primary educator for 0-3 when we can, and work with parents when we can’t.
The Meeting Street Academy in Charleston and Spartanburg founded by George Dean Johnson represents a marvelous example of how parents have become a part of early education, of how home and school can work together.
In all things, family should be encouraged. I realize this may be outside the scope of this committee, but one way to do that might be to help poor families thrive financially. For at least six years, John Rouff of SC Fair Share has been walking these halls attempting to generate interest in a state earned income tax credit. Could an EITC be devised that would help the working poor be better parents? Under certain conditions, now may be the time for an EITC along the lines of the federal version championed by Ronald Reagan.
Second, the Education of Young Children is in SC often a Faith Affair. The church and the church-sponsored school are extensions of the family. Government should protect the church as a private provider---a place where faith can be openly shared and celebrated, as in the family.
This brings me quickly to an adjacent third point, The Education of Young Children in SC Has Represented a Marvelous Experiment in Free Enterprise that We Should Encourage not “Stateize.” If we were referring to a military junta somewhere in South America taking over a private industry it would be called “nationalization.” I am not aware of a word to indicate takeover of an industry or ministry in the private sector by a state government, so I have coined “stateize.”
I urge you to in all cases seek to make private options work. After the family, the state should defer (or default) to private enterprise and the free market. Best practices should be used as models, and the highest level of accountability for public dollars should be non-negotiable, but free enterprise is the reason for South Carolina’s very existence. Free enterprise should be allowed to work in the sphere of the education of young children.
Private sector early childhood providers:
- Allow parents to retain more control over their children’s early years.
- Specialize in early childhood only and do not blend toddlers with much older children.
- They also offer closer monitoring of transportation issues for small children.
- Can usually educate a child for less than the state, all while paying state and local taxes.
- Are allowed to teach from the Bible and offer spiritual instruction, which is vitally important during the early years of a child’s life. Government takeover equals secularization of care.
- Represent hundreds of families who have dedicated their lives to the education of young children. They are an extension of the family.
- Are just that, private. They are small businesses representing the spirit of free enterprise that built this nation.
- Are regulated effectively, unlike unlicensed home day care facilities.
For a preview of what might be on the horizon if we are not vigilant in this area, we need only to look towards Great Britain. Even with that country’s greater tolerance for government intervention, many there are concerned that government-dominated child care has gone too far.
In fact, the (2010) platform for Britain’s Conservative Party states that while they support care for pre-school aged children, they want that care to be “provided by a diverse range of providers – including the many childminders and private, voluntary and independent nurseries which are currently being squeezed out of the system.”
Rather than rolling First Steps into Fort Rutledge, an unwelcome environment for building public-private partnerships, low income families in South Carolina would be better-served if parents were given flexible spending accounts to use for educational and educational therapy-related services for students. Florida and Arizona offer some families accounts such as these and have found high levels of parental satisfaction.[i] Florida’s preschool choice program includes specific academic goals and a provision to remove underperforming providers from participation in the program. Rigorous analyses of programs around the country that offer scholarships for private programs show significant levels of student achievement.[ii]
South Carolina’s goal should be to improve student outcomes and give families flexible, high-quality options to prepare their children to succeed—not simply to willy nilly enroll more young children in classroom settings at earlier ages.
Connected to Choice in Education is my fourth point, that the Education of Young Children Should Not Take a One Size Fits All Approach. Every child should not necessarily go to school at ages 0, 1, 2, or 3. A “universal” pre-school is hardly the logical response in a state that has since 1999 spent $436 million on early education programs, pushing more and more kids into pre-K while seeing 2 out of 3 state 4th graders reading at “Basic” or “Below Basic” levels—levels that indicate students are preforming below the appropriate grade level.[iii]
Research does not indicate that universal pre-k is the answer. We have significant work to do to insure the K-12 education system young children matriculate into is prepared to sustain any gains made amongst certain populations in early childhood. I’m afraid that as of now, we simply can’t say that’s the case.
A one size fits all Universal Money Bomb is not the answer. Justice Kittredge said as much in his dissent in Abbeville et. al. when he wrote that “…five of the eight districts in this litigation are in the top ten school districts in the state in terms of revenues received. Thus, Plaintiff Districts are among the highest funded districts in the state…”We urge you to continue on a path of targeting of funding, insuring that state dollars are sent where they will be used accountably and effectively to promote robust student achievement.
Fifth…and finally, and admittedly this has been touched on by earlier testimony…the Education of Young Children Should Not Be Held Hostage to Arcane, Even Byzantine Education Structure. In the Abbeville decision, Justice Toal writing for the majority said that “…it is striking that the parties to the instant litigation have focused narrowly on a struggle between education expenditures and education outcomes while ignoring the overarching dilemmas emanating from the organizational structure of public education.”[iv]
Palmetto Policy Forum has been on record since its inception about the drag on the system represented by multiple boards with overlapping and even competing responsibilities in education. We are particularly disturbed by a State Board of Education selected by odd-sized Judicial Circuits that rotate amongst the counties within the Circuit thus not democratically representing the families they are meant to serve.
But consider the First Steps to School Readiness Board of Trustees. It has been said that a camel is a horse designed by a committee. The First Steps governance structure surely looked like this progeny. Stakeholders, particularly private providers and business representatives must be at the table. But 39 members was quite large. A reduction to 25 is a great improvement. But a sound option would be to look to the MA, OH and MD models for how to fine tune an agency with a Commission and a CEO.
So, in conclusion, our request of this study committee in its deliberations, can be summarized with four “R’s”: Respect for the Family & Private Providers, a close monitoring of the state’s Return on Investment no matter what the provider, a Ramping Up of Opportunity through more and earlier choices for parents, and a Restructuring of Education Governance.
Thank you for the opportunity to share these thoughts with you.
[i]
Jonathan Butcher and Jason Bedrick, M.P.P., “Schooling Satisfaction: Arizona
Parents’ Opinions on Using Education Savings Accounts,” The Friedman Foundation
for Educational Choice, October 10, 2014, http://www.edchoice.org/Research/Reports/Schooling-Satisfaction--Arizona-Parents--Opinions-on-Using-Education-Savings-Accounts.aspx.
[ii]
Greg Forster, “A Win-Win Solution: The Empirical Evidence on School Choice,” 3rd
ed., April 2013, p. 3, http://www.edchoice.org/Research/Reports/A-Win-Win-Solution--The-Empirical-Evidence-on-School-Choice.aspx.
[iii]
U.S. Department of Education, “The Nation’s Report Card: 2013 Mathematics and
Reading,” http://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reading_math_2013/#/state-performance.
[iv] Abbeville County School District et al. v.
The State of South Carolina, SC Supreme Court Opinion No. 27466, November
12, 2014.
Friday, November 7, 2014
Vision SC Agenda
Our VisionSC 2014 agenda is here and not to be missed!
2nd Annual VisionSC Summit | Monday, November 17, 2014
Westin Poinsett Hotel | Greenville, SC
11:00 AM Opening Welcome
Former U.S. Senator Jim DeMint, Heritage Foundation
11:05 AM South Carolina’s Offshore Opportunity U.S. Representative Jeff Duncan, SC-03
Energy Panel Discussion (moderated by Representative Duncan)
Dr. James Knapp, University of South Carolina
Former Columbia Mayor Bob Coble, Nexsen Pruett
What would offshore energy exploration mean for South Carolina in terms of potential revenue, economic development and jobs? How would it impact our tourism industry and beautiful coast? These questions and more will be explored in this panel discussion: if offshore opportunity knocks, will South Carolina be ready?
12:05 PM Break
12:15 PM A Growth Agenda for South Carolina – and America
Steve Moore, Heritage Foundation
States are looking for ways to energize their economies and out-compete their neighbors. Each state confronts this task with a set of policy decisions unique to their own situation, but not all state policies lead to economic prosperity. Using years of economic data and empirical evidence, Steve has identified 15 policy areas that have proven, over time, to be the best determinants of economic vitality. Come learn South Carolina’s – and America’s – secret for success.
Presentation of Inaugural “Carroll A. Campbell, Jr. Vision in Leadership Award”
Presented to Greenville Mayor Knox H. White by Palmetto Policy Forum and the family of Governor Carroll Campbell.
2:00 PM Break
2:15 PM Breaking Down Barriers to Educational Choice in South Carolina
Kevin Chavous, American Federation for Children
Education Panel Discussion (moderated by Kevin Chavous)
Meka Childs, Education Management Consultant
Mike Sinclair, Principle of Brashier Middle College Charter High School
Dr. Susan Thomas, Head of Glenforest Academy
A bi-partisan wave of state-led education innovation is sweeping the nation. Courageous leaders are breaking down barriers and finding new ways to empower opportunity for students of every zip code with high-quality, customized education options. Hear more about this exciting national brushfire and how the embers are stirring in South Carolina.
3:30 PM Break
3:45-4:30 Advancing Liberty in the States
Matt Mayer, Liberty Foundation
Dr. Oran Smith, Palmetto Policy Forum
The founding fathers created a federal system to protect the states that formed it. Yet at every turn – from healthcare to highways – states are becoming increasingly dependent. Panelists will outline a strategic road map to return the balance of power to states and provide an update on how this struggle is playing out in South Carolina…and around the country.
4:30 Closing Remarks
4:45 Adjourn
Register online at www.tinyurl.com/VisionSC2014
2nd Annual VisionSC Summit | Monday, November 17, 2014
Westin Poinsett Hotel | Greenville, SC
11:00 AM Opening Welcome
Former U.S. Senator Jim DeMint, Heritage Foundation
11:05 AM South Carolina’s Offshore Opportunity U.S. Representative Jeff Duncan, SC-03
Energy Panel Discussion (moderated by Representative Duncan)
Dr. James Knapp, University of South Carolina
Former Columbia Mayor Bob Coble, Nexsen Pruett
What would offshore energy exploration mean for South Carolina in terms of potential revenue, economic development and jobs? How would it impact our tourism industry and beautiful coast? These questions and more will be explored in this panel discussion: if offshore opportunity knocks, will South Carolina be ready?
12:05 PM Break
12:15 PM A Growth Agenda for South Carolina – and America
Steve Moore, Heritage Foundation
States are looking for ways to energize their economies and out-compete their neighbors. Each state confronts this task with a set of policy decisions unique to their own situation, but not all state policies lead to economic prosperity. Using years of economic data and empirical evidence, Steve has identified 15 policy areas that have proven, over time, to be the best determinants of economic vitality. Come learn South Carolina’s – and America’s – secret for success.
Presentation of Inaugural “Carroll A. Campbell, Jr. Vision in Leadership Award”
Presented to Greenville Mayor Knox H. White by Palmetto Policy Forum and the family of Governor Carroll Campbell.
2:00 PM Break
2:15 PM Breaking Down Barriers to Educational Choice in South Carolina
Kevin Chavous, American Federation for Children
Education Panel Discussion (moderated by Kevin Chavous)
Meka Childs, Education Management Consultant
Mike Sinclair, Principle of Brashier Middle College Charter High School
Dr. Susan Thomas, Head of Glenforest Academy
A bi-partisan wave of state-led education innovation is sweeping the nation. Courageous leaders are breaking down barriers and finding new ways to empower opportunity for students of every zip code with high-quality, customized education options. Hear more about this exciting national brushfire and how the embers are stirring in South Carolina.
3:30 PM Break
3:45-4:30 Advancing Liberty in the States
Matt Mayer, Liberty Foundation
Dr. Oran Smith, Palmetto Policy Forum
The founding fathers created a federal system to protect the states that formed it. Yet at every turn – from healthcare to highways – states are becoming increasingly dependent. Panelists will outline a strategic road map to return the balance of power to states and provide an update on how this struggle is playing out in South Carolina…and around the country.
4:30 Closing Remarks
4:45 Adjourn
Register online at www.tinyurl.com/VisionSC2014
Thursday, November 6, 2014
Our South Carolina State Standards Review Taskforce Response
TO: The South Carolina State Department of Education
FROM: Palmetto Policy Forum & Palmetto Family Council
Thank you for the invitation to submit feedback on South Carolina’s proposed Mathematics and English Language Arts (ELA) standards. Our goal in submitting this review is to contribute a thoughtful perspective to a constructive dialogue that results in rigorous, state‐controlled standards that will create an environment of excellence for our students and clear guidance and support for our teachers.
FROM: Palmetto Policy Forum & Palmetto Family Council
Thank you for the invitation to submit feedback on South Carolina’s proposed Mathematics and English Language Arts (ELA) standards. Our goal in submitting this review is to contribute a thoughtful perspective to a constructive dialogue that results in rigorous, state‐controlled standards that will create an environment of excellence for our students and clear guidance and support for our teachers.
1. Are the standards clear, rigorous and able to be implemented without delay or significant additional professional development? Are the Standards college and career/workforce ready?
The Standards appear to be technically college and career/workforce ready. However, they are not rigorous enough to compel an advancement in the outcomes of the highest performing students. They represent a marginal improvement over the status quo in moving away from Common Core, but will put the state in the position of needing to raise the standards again soon if we are serious about quality and rigor.
However, a possible advantage of a stepwise path to rigor is that given the short timeline with which South Carolina is working, the implementation of the standards will not be further delayed by intensive new content mastery for many South Carolina teachers. Some standards are so rigorous as to be beyond the current reach of the typical teacher, which is fine if the implementation planning incorporates adequate time for teachers to re‐tool. But often – as in this case – the transition timelines are so fast that they adversely affect teachers with weaker content mastery and those for whom new content appears (as content shifts from one grade to another) and therefore does nothing to serve the students who the standards ultimately aim to serve.
We find the format of the proposed English standards is not user‐friendly from the teacher perspective. It is likely that the South Carolina Department of Education (SCDE) will need to compensate for this through supporting documents and professional development. The standards document needs to better explain the structure of the standard. Teachers will have to spend too much energy figuring out how the standards work.
2. Do the Standards avoid the problems of Common Core State Standards (CCSS) while retaining its positive aspects?
The 2015 Standards rewriting process was created to eliminate CCSS‐related problems and advance the will of the Legislature in other areas. How did it fare?
Math: On the former, it is not clear whether the new standards are charting a clear path away from the concepts of "Everyday Math" rightly or wrongly associated with CCSS that have been so universally panned by parents, teachers and students alike. Several CCSS‐like references to "Mathematical Process Standards" leave this in doubt. It is also unclear whether the new Standards reflect the desire of the General Assembly, as reflected in Act 275 (2014), the "Back to Basics in Education Act," which requires "students to memorize multiplication tables to ensure that students can effectively multiply numbers by the end of fifth grade." We recommend that the Committee closely review California’s former Math standards as a model of rigor and best practice.
ELA: The Common Core State Standards provided exemplars. We see none here, but that is advisable as this leaves these choices up to individual school districts. A positive aspect of CCSS was its commitment to what scholars have called a "coherent, sequential knowledge” in building literacy. These draft ELA Standards do not appear to provide that level of coherence and guidance.
We recommend that Committee closely review Massachusetts’ ELA standards as a model of rigor and best practice.
Conclusions: This effort to craft our own South Carolina state standards in such a tight time frame was a monumental task. We trust that our suggestions for improvement are useful to the writing teams. But as important as South Carolina developed Standards are, the lessons of this process are far broader than Standards. We suggest four important takeaways:
1) Federal involvement in education, especially when tied to federal funding is ill advised, and even dangerous;
2) Education governance in this state is perilously diffuse and unaccountable to the will of the parents, as this entire CCSS issue has demonstrated;
3) Parental involvement is more important than Standards or any other factor, and for parents to be involved they must have greater access to high‐quality public and private education; and
4) There is no more crucial force in the education of a child, outside of parents, than a well trained, effective teacher.
Respectfully submitted,
Ellen E. Weaver
President & CEO
Palmetto Policy Forum
Oran P. Smith, PhD
President & CEO
Palmetto Family Council
Oran P. Smith, PhD
President & CEO
Palmetto Family Council
Finding Midterm Meaning
It’s no secret what happened Tuesday night: an unmistakably Republican electoral tidal wave swept across the country. The question is why. We know we’ll hear the predictable punditry on 24-hour cable news from both the left and the right, slicing and dicing the demographics, pointing fingers of blame for losses…and of course taking all the credit for wins.
But that shallow analysis does a disservice to the millions of Americans, regardless of party, who cared enough to make their voices heard. These voters expressed their deepest held beliefs about their country and their communities…and in many cases the very real fear that the American Dream is slipping through the fingers of our generation.
Without a Presidential candidate at the top of the ticket (despite the President’s attempts to insert himself as the defining issue), what we saw in these midterms was a policy – not personality – driven election. The fact is, governors who lowered taxes to create growth and opportunity in their states won, even in traditionally moderate or left leaning environments. Those who raised taxes lost. Voters stood by governors who stood strong against Washington’s mandate to push able-bodied, working age people into the broken Medicaid system at the expense of the elderly and disabled.
Even in governor’s races in solidly blue states like Illinois, Maryland and Massachusetts we saw a repudiation of irresponsible government spending and the unsustainable “good intentions” that are bankrupting those states (and ironically, trapping the very people they claim to champion in a cycle of perpetual poverty).
Voters decisively rejected destructive identity politics that seek to divide us by race, gender, income. We saw an historic victory right here in our own back yard as Senator Tim Scott became the first black elected to the U.S. Senate from a southern state since Reconstruction. And that rhetorical “War on Women” (that never actually was)? Stick a fork in it, because it’s done with the election of Iowa’s first female Senator Joni Ernst; Elise Stefanick, the youngest woman ever elected to Congress; and the re-election of several strong female governors.
And if you really want to pack a paradigm shattering one-two punch, how about Mia Love, the first-ever black female Republican to be sent to Congress? It’s clear that voters are looking for courageous leadership that is grounded in principled ideas and promotes policy solutions to unite us in true hope, not divide us for partisan political purposes.
And therein lies both the challenge and the opportunity ahead. As the dust settles and the real work of governing begins, we know that on both sides of the aisle, the inertia of status quo thinking and the poison pill of political calculation will be as strong as ever.
But we can do better. Let’s determine on both on the left and the right that we are stronger than the culture of political cynicism and division in which we swim. Let’s recognize that commitment to our state and country can only be properly expressed in personal love of our fellow man.
Love that enables us to put down tired political dogmas and sets us free to risk engaging in respectful, authentic conversations with people who may see things differently. To extend and inconvenience ourselves for the sake of our neighbors and communities. Not in a condescending, government-driven paternalism: after all, government can’t love anyone! But in an ennobling belief in the inherent dignity and worth of every human being…and a resulting determination to create a policy environment in which everyone can thrive:
More choices in education to allow every student the opportunity of a customized, high-quality education. Locally controlled healthcare solutions that lower cost, increase access to care and put the doctor/patient relationship first. Responsible development of energy resources that lower gas prices for families and foster energy independence. Tax policies that grow local businesses and create new jobs. And that’s just a start.
This love – and not electoral politics – is the soil out of which our ideas and future actions must grow. It is the nourishing common ground on which we stand as conservative to say that we fight not for things but for people. For the chance of every individual to realize their fullest God-given potential.
As Martin Luther King, Jr. so beautifully expressed from a jail cell in Birmingham, “…by its very nature, love creates and builds up. Love transforms with redemptive power.” Unless we put this truth into action in our public discourse and actions, this midterm will soon fade into the memory as just one more election in the never-ending cycle of negativity.
So will our leaders recognize the challenge and seize the opportunity? Let’s pray for the sake of our state and country that they do.
Ellen Weaver is President & CEO of Palmetto Policy Forum a non-partisan, 501(c)3 education foundation.
But that shallow analysis does a disservice to the millions of Americans, regardless of party, who cared enough to make their voices heard. These voters expressed their deepest held beliefs about their country and their communities…and in many cases the very real fear that the American Dream is slipping through the fingers of our generation.
Without a Presidential candidate at the top of the ticket (despite the President’s attempts to insert himself as the defining issue), what we saw in these midterms was a policy – not personality – driven election. The fact is, governors who lowered taxes to create growth and opportunity in their states won, even in traditionally moderate or left leaning environments. Those who raised taxes lost. Voters stood by governors who stood strong against Washington’s mandate to push able-bodied, working age people into the broken Medicaid system at the expense of the elderly and disabled.
Even in governor’s races in solidly blue states like Illinois, Maryland and Massachusetts we saw a repudiation of irresponsible government spending and the unsustainable “good intentions” that are bankrupting those states (and ironically, trapping the very people they claim to champion in a cycle of perpetual poverty).
Voters decisively rejected destructive identity politics that seek to divide us by race, gender, income. We saw an historic victory right here in our own back yard as Senator Tim Scott became the first black elected to the U.S. Senate from a southern state since Reconstruction. And that rhetorical “War on Women” (that never actually was)? Stick a fork in it, because it’s done with the election of Iowa’s first female Senator Joni Ernst; Elise Stefanick, the youngest woman ever elected to Congress; and the re-election of several strong female governors.
And if you really want to pack a paradigm shattering one-two punch, how about Mia Love, the first-ever black female Republican to be sent to Congress? It’s clear that voters are looking for courageous leadership that is grounded in principled ideas and promotes policy solutions to unite us in true hope, not divide us for partisan political purposes.
And therein lies both the challenge and the opportunity ahead. As the dust settles and the real work of governing begins, we know that on both sides of the aisle, the inertia of status quo thinking and the poison pill of political calculation will be as strong as ever.
But we can do better. Let’s determine on both on the left and the right that we are stronger than the culture of political cynicism and division in which we swim. Let’s recognize that commitment to our state and country can only be properly expressed in personal love of our fellow man.
Love that enables us to put down tired political dogmas and sets us free to risk engaging in respectful, authentic conversations with people who may see things differently. To extend and inconvenience ourselves for the sake of our neighbors and communities. Not in a condescending, government-driven paternalism: after all, government can’t love anyone! But in an ennobling belief in the inherent dignity and worth of every human being…and a resulting determination to create a policy environment in which everyone can thrive:
More choices in education to allow every student the opportunity of a customized, high-quality education. Locally controlled healthcare solutions that lower cost, increase access to care and put the doctor/patient relationship first. Responsible development of energy resources that lower gas prices for families and foster energy independence. Tax policies that grow local businesses and create new jobs. And that’s just a start.
This love – and not electoral politics – is the soil out of which our ideas and future actions must grow. It is the nourishing common ground on which we stand as conservative to say that we fight not for things but for people. For the chance of every individual to realize their fullest God-given potential.
As Martin Luther King, Jr. so beautifully expressed from a jail cell in Birmingham, “…by its very nature, love creates and builds up. Love transforms with redemptive power.” Unless we put this truth into action in our public discourse and actions, this midterm will soon fade into the memory as just one more election in the never-ending cycle of negativity.
So will our leaders recognize the challenge and seize the opportunity? Let’s pray for the sake of our state and country that they do.
Ellen Weaver is President & CEO of Palmetto Policy Forum a non-partisan, 501(c)3 education foundation.
Tuesday, October 28, 2014
"Advance Carolina" Becomes 1st Special Needs Scholarship Provider
Exciting news for South Carolina students with exceptional needs!
-----
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January13th, 2014
Contact: Access Opportunity South Carolina (AOSC)
www.IndependentED.org
“ADVANCE CAROLINA” LISTED AS FIRST SPECIAL NEEDS SCHOLARSHIP PROVIDER
This morning, Advance Carolina became the first organization authorized to issue scholarships as part of the state’s new school choice program. Advance Carolina is a Columbia-based charity supporting students with disabilities.
South Carolina’s new program, “Educational Credits for Exceptional Needs Children,” allows private taxpayers to fund grants for students with special learning needs who attend independent primary and secondary schools. Like dozens of parental choice programs in other states, the goal is to help all parents gain access to schools that meet the individual learning needs of their child.
Advance Carolina was created by leaders of the South Carolina Association of Christian Schools (SCACS) to serve students with special educations needs at SCACS-affiliated schools .The non-profit also looks to serve exceptional needs students enrolling at other independent, non-sectarian private schools. Directors and staffers have decades of personal experience as Christian educators, and are eager to target help to students with the greatest academic, financial and familial need.
Both individual and corporate donors to Advance Carolina are eligible for state income tax credits. These contributors can to claim that dollar for dollar credit for up to 60 percent of their one-year tax liability. They are not allowed to designate specific student or school as beneficiary of the grant.
“Every morning, thousands of children across South Carolina head off to high quality, SCACS-affiliated schools,” explained Edward Earwood, the president of Advance Carolina.” Those schools are proud of their high standards, community engagement and sense of Christian mission. Many also offer highly specialized instruction for students facing special learning needs. The tax credit funded scholarships will help families seeking to enroll their children at SCACS’ and other independent schools who offer special programs for students with special needs. That will give parents –particularly those facing financial hardships– real choices.”
Advance Carolina is one of two aspiring SFOs to sign the “Access Opportunity Best Practices Pledge,” a voluntary pledge that includes a disclosure questionnaire about scholarship awarding practices. The other is the St. Thomas Aquinas SFO, which is affiliated with the Roman Catholic Diocese of Charleston. Access Opportunity South Carolina (AOSC) partnered with a coalition of South Carolina private schools and respected scholarship providers around the country to develop the pledge and questionnaire. The best practice pledge includes a commitment by the signatory SFOs to hold their employees, volunteers, and contractors to the same high standards the ECENC already requires of their Board of Directors. That includes a strict prohibition against felons, bankruptcy filers and the parents of grant recipients. Access Opportunity also provides parents and the public with details of the tax credit funded scholarship program and participating schools at its IndependentED.org website.
“Holding to the Access Opportunity Pledge is just one more way we work to run an effective, efficient and ethical scholarship organization,” said Earwood. “It’s just common sense.”
###
"Read to Succeed" Must Cross the Legislative Finish Line
The ability to read is a primary gateway to success in school and life-long learning. A child who does not master this fundamental skill faces daunting odds. Consider these sobering statistics from the Annie E. Casey Foundation:
· Children who are not reading proficiently in 3rd grade are 4 times more likely to not graduate high school.
· Below basic readers are almost 6 times more likely than proficient readers to not finish high school on time.
· Poor, Black, and Hispanic students who are struggling readers are about 8 times more likely than proficient readers to drop out of high school.
Why is this the case? Because from kindergarten through third grade, students are learning to read. Beginning in fourth grade a student is asked to use their reading skills in order to learn. If a student struggles to read when they enter fourth grade, not only are they already behind most of their peers but they are also at great risk of falling further and further off the pace.
Right here in South Carolina, the most recent National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) shows that 51% of low income 4th grade students and 40% of all 4th grade students cannot read at even a basic level. We face a truly monumental task.
But the good news is pioneering states like Florida have shown there is a proven path forward. And with the “Read to Succeed” legislation modeled on Florida’s success currently moving through the General Assembly, it’s clear that South Carolina legislators understand the urgency of the need.
Two bills — S. 516 and H. 3994, sponsored by Senator Harvey Peeler and Representative Andy Patrick respectively — have the potential to profoundly change the future for thousands of Palmetto State students. These bills put a laser focus on literacy, hands down the most critical skill our schools must teach. By putting priority on key policy components like improved teacher training, state and district reading plans, summer reading camps and reading readiness assessments, we can help students unlock the door to reading success.
Much attention has been placed on the third-grade retention portion of the policy as if that is all these bills contain. But that is only the last resort for struggling students. The true power of Florida’s successful model stems from the dynamic duo of support and accountability.
To retain third-graders who struggle to read but not provide them with a new and intensive literacy action plan would not help the underlying problem at all. Indeed, it’s pure folly to ask a student to simply repeat a grade and expect a different result. On the other hand, calling for early interventions and greater literacy support for students and teachers without drawing a hard line in the sand at the end of third-grade is an inefficient strategy, since as the Casey statistics illustrate, proficient third-grade reading is the non-negotiable end goal that will enable long-term student success. “Read to Succeed” strikes the right balance between these two critical elements of support and accountability.
Governor Nikki Haley has publicly championed the cause in her executive budget and the House has set aside $30 million to implement the policy. But while both the Senate and House have already passed their own versions of this legislation, a strong version of the bill still needs to cross the legislative finish line with both its accountability and interventions intact.
Similar, stand-alone reading bills have recently been passed by states like Mississippi with broad bipartisan support and South Carolina’s “Read to Succeed” should not be derailed by unrelated agendas. This just might be the most important legislation for our state in the last decade.
A strong, focused “Read to Succeed” policy will open up new worlds of learning for struggling readers in the Palmetto State. Let’s cross the legislative finish line together this year to give them that opportunity.
· Children who are not reading proficiently in 3rd grade are 4 times more likely to not graduate high school.
· Below basic readers are almost 6 times more likely than proficient readers to not finish high school on time.
· Poor, Black, and Hispanic students who are struggling readers are about 8 times more likely than proficient readers to drop out of high school.
Why is this the case? Because from kindergarten through third grade, students are learning to read. Beginning in fourth grade a student is asked to use their reading skills in order to learn. If a student struggles to read when they enter fourth grade, not only are they already behind most of their peers but they are also at great risk of falling further and further off the pace.
Right here in South Carolina, the most recent National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) shows that 51% of low income 4th grade students and 40% of all 4th grade students cannot read at even a basic level. We face a truly monumental task.
But the good news is pioneering states like Florida have shown there is a proven path forward. And with the “Read to Succeed” legislation modeled on Florida’s success currently moving through the General Assembly, it’s clear that South Carolina legislators understand the urgency of the need.
Two bills — S. 516 and H. 3994, sponsored by Senator Harvey Peeler and Representative Andy Patrick respectively — have the potential to profoundly change the future for thousands of Palmetto State students. These bills put a laser focus on literacy, hands down the most critical skill our schools must teach. By putting priority on key policy components like improved teacher training, state and district reading plans, summer reading camps and reading readiness assessments, we can help students unlock the door to reading success.
Much attention has been placed on the third-grade retention portion of the policy as if that is all these bills contain. But that is only the last resort for struggling students. The true power of Florida’s successful model stems from the dynamic duo of support and accountability.
To retain third-graders who struggle to read but not provide them with a new and intensive literacy action plan would not help the underlying problem at all. Indeed, it’s pure folly to ask a student to simply repeat a grade and expect a different result. On the other hand, calling for early interventions and greater literacy support for students and teachers without drawing a hard line in the sand at the end of third-grade is an inefficient strategy, since as the Casey statistics illustrate, proficient third-grade reading is the non-negotiable end goal that will enable long-term student success. “Read to Succeed” strikes the right balance between these two critical elements of support and accountability.
Governor Nikki Haley has publicly championed the cause in her executive budget and the House has set aside $30 million to implement the policy. But while both the Senate and House have already passed their own versions of this legislation, a strong version of the bill still needs to cross the legislative finish line with both its accountability and interventions intact.
Similar, stand-alone reading bills have recently been passed by states like Mississippi with broad bipartisan support and South Carolina’s “Read to Succeed” should not be derailed by unrelated agendas. This just might be the most important legislation for our state in the last decade.
A strong, focused “Read to Succeed” policy will open up new worlds of learning for struggling readers in the Palmetto State. Let’s cross the legislative finish line together this year to give them that opportunity.
The Solution to Our Energy Need is...South Carolina!
Tuesday, October 7, 2014
Falling Unemployment – Road to Recovery or Dead End?
Today, Palmetto Policy Forum joined the Liberty Foundation of America to release the following look at unemployment numbers and labor participation across gender and race in South Carolina:
Last Friday, headlines heralded the news that America’s official unemployment rate had fallen below 6% for the first time since 2008. Surely, a sign that we’re on the path to recovery, right? A closer look says “not so fast.” After 5 years of unfettered progressive policy in Washington, the reality of the Left’s lofty rhetoric of greater fairness and compassion has been much closer to an all-out mugging of the very people they claim to be “helping.” In fact, a recent poll by the Pew Research Center found that a full 45% of Americans believe the unemployment rate is actually 9% or higher, a sure sign that perception trumps headlines. But a quick look at the real statistics after 5 years of President Obama’s progressive crusade against the rich shows America’s perceptions may be far closer to reflecting reality than the unemployment rate itself:
• According to UC Berkeley economist Emmanual Saez, 95% of the Obama “recovery” gains (in terms of real income growth) have accrued to much maligned “top 1%”.
• 1 in 6 Americans currently rely on food stamps (SNAP), an almost 50% increase since President Obama took office in January 2009.
• According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the percentage of Americans who are working is the lowest it has been since the days of Jimmy Carter. As New York Times writer Binyamin Appelbaum aptly said, “We are basically ‘recovering from the recession’ by reducing the share of Americans who participate in the labor force. Hurrah!”
And South Carolina – despite strong overall population gains over the last decade – has been no exception to that trend. The following Palmetto Policy Forum report, produced in collaboration with the Liberty Foundation, starkly illustrates the disturbing truth. From 2008 to the most complete numbers we have in 2013, South Carolina’s labor participation has seen a uniform, steady decline across gender and race, aside from a 2012-2013 rebound among Hispanic workers.
Last Friday, headlines heralded the news that America’s official unemployment rate had fallen below 6% for the first time since 2008. Surely, a sign that we’re on the path to recovery, right? A closer look says “not so fast.” After 5 years of unfettered progressive policy in Washington, the reality of the Left’s lofty rhetoric of greater fairness and compassion has been much closer to an all-out mugging of the very people they claim to be “helping.” In fact, a recent poll by the Pew Research Center found that a full 45% of Americans believe the unemployment rate is actually 9% or higher, a sure sign that perception trumps headlines. But a quick look at the real statistics after 5 years of President Obama’s progressive crusade against the rich shows America’s perceptions may be far closer to reflecting reality than the unemployment rate itself:
• According to UC Berkeley economist Emmanual Saez, 95% of the Obama “recovery” gains (in terms of real income growth) have accrued to much maligned “top 1%”.
• 1 in 6 Americans currently rely on food stamps (SNAP), an almost 50% increase since President Obama took office in January 2009.
• According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the percentage of Americans who are working is the lowest it has been since the days of Jimmy Carter. As New York Times writer Binyamin Appelbaum aptly said, “We are basically ‘recovering from the recession’ by reducing the share of Americans who participate in the labor force. Hurrah!”
And South Carolina – despite strong overall population gains over the last decade – has been no exception to that trend. The following Palmetto Policy Forum report, produced in collaboration with the Liberty Foundation, starkly illustrates the disturbing truth. From 2008 to the most complete numbers we have in 2013, South Carolina’s labor participation has seen a uniform, steady decline across gender and race, aside from a 2012-2013 rebound among Hispanic workers.
Wednesday, October 1, 2014
ELECT OR APPOINT? SC To Decide Process for Adjutant General’s Selection
DID YOU KNOW? This fall, South Carolina voters will be asked to decide whether or not South Carolina should continue to be the only state in America that still elects it’s Adjutant General….a position that very few know much about. Earlier this year, the Spartanburg
Herald Journal did a good job laying out some key considerations:
The second amendment on the ballot would change the way the state selects its adjutant general. This is the only state in the union that elects its adjutant general. That poses some problems. Promotion to military rank and command is usually accomplished through merit, service and experience rather than the popular vote. Under South Carolina’s current system, a sergeant can run for adjutant general, and if he wins, he is automatically promoted to the rank of general. That not only creates difficulty in the chain of command, it puts the state’s adjutant general at a disadvantage in dealing with commanders from other states and from federal forces. The adjutant general is not only in charge of the national and state guard, he is also responsible for South Carolina’s Emergency Management Division and the Emergency Preparedness Division. The governor is the commander in chief, and in a time of emergency, the state looks to the governor for leadership, quick decisions and efficient action to implement those decisions. The governor will be better prepared to do so if the person who handles these emergency departments is someone of his or her own choosing who reports to the governor’s office. In order to act quickly and properly in an emergency, the governor needs to be familiar with emergency plans and procedures. Making the adjutant general an appointed position will put emergency planning under the governor’s control and make the state’s chief executive better equipped for the next hurricane or disaster.
The second amendment on the ballot would change the way the state selects its adjutant general. This is the only state in the union that elects its adjutant general. That poses some problems. Promotion to military rank and command is usually accomplished through merit, service and experience rather than the popular vote. Under South Carolina’s current system, a sergeant can run for adjutant general, and if he wins, he is automatically promoted to the rank of general. That not only creates difficulty in the chain of command, it puts the state’s adjutant general at a disadvantage in dealing with commanders from other states and from federal forces. The adjutant general is not only in charge of the national and state guard, he is also responsible for South Carolina’s Emergency Management Division and the Emergency Preparedness Division. The governor is the commander in chief, and in a time of emergency, the state looks to the governor for leadership, quick decisions and efficient action to implement those decisions. The governor will be better prepared to do so if the person who handles these emergency departments is someone of his or her own choosing who reports to the governor’s office. In order to act quickly and properly in an emergency, the governor needs to be familiar with emergency plans and procedures. Making the adjutant general an appointed position will put emergency planning under the governor’s control and make the state’s chief executive better equipped for the next hurricane or disaster.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)