Category Archives: Education (higher ed)

Technology and UVa’s Mission

by James A. Bacon

Three days ago, I criticized University of Virginia President Teresa Sullivan for proposing to jack up tuition roughly 20% over the next four years. Clearly, the four-year plan she is submitting to the Board of Visitors champions the interests of the faculty and administration over those of the students. But that doesn’t mean the four-year plan is entirely without merit. In fact, there appears to be some very good thinking in it… assuming the goal of building a world-class university supersedes all others.

In particular, I am intrigued by Sullivan’s proposal to invest more heavily in information technology. Technology is changing the way people “teach, learn, discover, publish and collaborate,” she writes. “The very fabric of inquiry is being altered by data, computation, and emerging tools of digital expression.”

While  current IT funding has allowed the university to meet normal levels of service demand, UVa spends only 2.4% of its institutional budget on central IT compared to 3% for doctoral institutions generally. Proposing to dedicate more resources to IT, Sullivan outlines four “areas of strategic focus”:

Enhanced IT security, records management and compliance. The university is poorly positioned to respond to the rapidly change IT threat environment — the network is tested “thousands of times a day” by hackers and automated bots. Over the next four years, Sullivan proposes, UVa should double its investment in this area, with particular emphasis on mobile technology, enhanced security for big data, eDiscovery, intrusion detection and data loss protection.

Advanced networks, big data and digital scholarship. The national Science Foundation is encouraging research institutions to move to 100-gigabyte-per-second networks. The university is seeking partners to offset capital and operational costs which could amount to as much as $10 million up front and $2 million a year. Sullivan also wants $2 million over four years to add 2.6 petabytes of storage (250 gigabytes per faculty member).

UVa has been at the forefront of digital research and scholarship. Two programs deploy “tiger teams,” groups of computational/ digital experts who work intensively with scholars to raise their research to the next computational level. The programs face more demand than they can handle, and Sullivan wants to hire staff at an annual cost of $700,000.

Analytics. Sullivan wants to add a data warehouse to its Oracle financial system in order to conduct more robust reporting and analysis. The move is all the more necessary as the university moves to a more decentralized financial model holding units accountable for revenues and expenses.

Online and technology-enhanced learning. Over the next two years, central IT should hire five employees to support copyright clearance, video production and project management and accessible compliance at an ongoing cost of $500,000. the positions should be located and funded within the academic units because the need for discipline-specific knowledge limits the ability to scale across units.

I don’t know enough about the technology to agree or disagree with the specifics of Sullivan’s plan, but I do believe she is raising important issues.

Much of the discussion about UVa’s technology future has revolved around utilizing online-learning technology to drive down the cost of education, making the university’s world-class faculty more accessible to a larger number of people at less cost. UVa is experimenting with online learning but, judging by this document, Sullivan’s heart resides elsewhere.

The UVa president sees technology as a tool to empower the university’s faculty members, enabling them to shine as scholars and researchers. This vision is sure to warm the hearts of UVa professors — can there be any question why the faculty loves her so?

If UVa’s mission is to provide an affordable, high-quality education for Virginia citizens, Sullivan’s plan will not get us there. If the university’s vision is to build upon its reputation as one of the nation’s elite universities offering a premium-priced product for the cognitive and income elite as the rest of the world embraces online learning, then Sullivan’s plan is just the thing.

I have been critical of Sullivan because I’ve always thought of UVa as a public university that provided me an excellent education for a price that did not bankrupt my parents. But perhaps that idea is outdated. Perhaps UVa should push to become an elite institution. In a future post,  I’ll play devil’s advocate and make the case for just such a future.

More Big Tuition Hikes Ahead for UVa

Whatcha gonna do about it?

by James A. Bacon

University of Virginia President Teresa Sullivan has developed a four-year financial plan that would jack up base tuition by 2.5% to 3.5% annually. Moreover, her plan would boost McIntire School of Business tuition by $5,000 yearly above the base rate, the School of Engineering tuition by $2,000, and the tuition for other students by $2,000 annually in their third and fourth years. The latter charge is designed to cover the higher cost of “smaller class sizes, rigorous capstone courses, global learning opportunities, career placement and internships and increased research opportunities.”

Currently, UVa charges returning in-state students $12,014 a year in tuition and fees. The combined effect of all the adjustments will be a 4.7% annual increase for in-state students and 3.0% for out-of-state students over four years. Reminder: The Consumer Price Index in 2012 was 2.1% and is running less than that so far in 2013.

Wow. That boggles the mind. Did Sullivan learn absolutely nothing from her firing/rehiring episode last year? Or does she feel that the political tide has turned so much in her favor that she can deliver an Italian chin flick to her critics?

The Board of Visitors’ finance committee is expected to discuss the plan next week. There could be fireworks. Rector Helen Dragas had told the Washington Post earlier this month that she opposed further tuition increases. While tuition has nearly doubled since 2004, the economy has left many Virginia families with declining incomes.

And what does Sullivan propose to do with the money? Writes the WaPo:

University leaders plan to invest in the “significantly underfunded” library, modernize the school’s technology to support online learning and set aside millions in a “strategic investment fund” that could be used to recruit or retain star faculty, finance partnerships with private companies or support new programs or collaborations.

There is no indication that Sullivan is contemplating a restructuring of academic programs. However, according to her plan, which is posted to the Board of Visitor’s website and is available here, she does expect to generate operational efficiencies of $7.4 million in FY 2013 and to achieve additional productivity savings on an ongoing basis. Those savings from procurement, human resources, student service and administration will go to a “strategic pool” of funds to address the administration’s highest priorities.

Otherwise, a quick review of the plan suggests that Sullivan is determined to avoid the hard choices (other than milking the students) in favor of doubling down on Business As Usual. Apparently, the plan does give a nod to online learning, but that is only a small component of a larger $18 million Information Technology initiative that includes enhanced security, big data, computationally intense digital scholarship, and analytics.

Furthermore, it appears that Sullivan remains oblivious to the larger challenge of affordability and access, other perhaps than for the poor. Of the $83 million coming from four years of tuition increases, only $8.5 million will be plowed back to student aid.

Brace yourselves for for another bruising round over the future of higher education at Virginia’s flagship institution.

Note: I have re-written significant portions of this post after reviewing Sullivan’s report. My original version was based upon Washington Post reporting that was either inaccurate, incomplete or confusing.

The “New” Mind of the South

By Peter Galuszka

What is “the South” all about?

It’s a great question about what could fairly be described the most unique, tortured and remote region of the United States. Being “Southern” requires not only a special state of mind, but a special spirit that is, by turns, as alluring as it is odious. It produces lots of consternation among rational thinkers since the Southern cocktail is such a powerful blend of contrasts.

One of the first penetrating examinations of this phenomenon came in 1940 from a Charlotte newspaperman named W.J. Cash. His “Mind of the South” stunned me as I read it in college since I was undergoing my own personal identity crisis about whether I was a Southerner or not (probably not since my parents are from up north). If you want a clear-headed and tough look about white elites playing the race and class card for profits, look no further.

Now comes another book “The New Mind of the South,” (Simon & Schuster) that gives us an update on some of the same ideas. Author Tracy Thompson, a former reporter for the Atlanta Constitution and The Washington Post gives us a nice, likeable read exploring how the Southern conundrum remains despite some profound changes including waves of immigrants and Yankees, suburbanization, the fall of employment in farming and manufacturing and the entire idea that the very adjective of “Southern” is being diluted.

First off, Thompson’s book is not as important as Cash’s work, which was written during Jim Crow, anti-union strife and a year after the gushy romanticism of Hollywood’s “Gone With the Wind.” This doesn’t mean Thompson’s work shouldn’t be read.

Thompson comes from a Georgia and Alabama family and grew up in Atlanta although she spent much of her recent adult life in the D.C. suburbs. That in no way detracts from her acute observations about the region delivered in the gracious charm that Southern women have, save for that sharp stiletto of wit that she can whip out when the mood suits. (When I was a young newspaper reporter in North Carolina and out on the town dating local belles, I was cut many times).

Thompson’s modern South wavers between change and history, all adding up to a memory that won’t go away and perhaps never should. The South never can escape slavery, its violence, its hypocrisy and the War. “The Civil War,” she writes, “is like a mountain range that guards against all roads into the South: you can’t go there without encountering it.”

The epicenter of preserving the memory, naturally, is in Virginia, where the memory organizations are based, such as the United Daughters of the Confederacy, nestled in Richmond. The UDC spent the latter half of the 19th Century and the early part of the 20th erecting marble monuments to Confederate soldiers in just about every town south of the Mason-Dixon line. The organization was the way the “South’s ruling white elite,” could “revere the memory of those heroes in grey.”

By extension, this orgy of honor resulted in plenty of nasty stuff, such as a 1913 purge of textbooks in Texas that were considered to be written from too much of a “New England” point of view when it came to the war. There was far worse, stuff, of course, namely lynchings and the Ku Klux Klan, and Thompson presses how such events that occurred near her Georgia childhood home were somehow never mentioned. (As a grade school pupil in West Virginia, I never heard about labor wars against coal barons, either)

Such mythology remains strong today through such groups as the Sons of Confederate veterans, the UDC and even in fourth grade books printed in Connecticut recently that taught children that thousands of slaves fought for the South. Virginia got rid of the books after the error was revealed.

Thompson has some colorful reporting on a UDC event she attended in 2008 in Fredericksburg. Called “Children of the Confederacy,” the program brought together moms and their kids dressed up like Scarlett O’Hara and Ashley Wilkes. She writes:

“On the other side sat a little blond boy of about two, sucking on a sippy cup and wearing a tiny pair of neatly creased Confederate gray flannel trousers, suspenders and a Rebel kepi hat. Before I could ask her where on earth a person went to find a Confederate Army private’s uniform in size 2T, the program started: an invocation, followed by a salute to the Christian flag, a hymn, the Pledge of Allegiance “The Star Spangled Banner,” Of, of course, “Dixie.”’

As part of her youth quest, Thompson also takes us to Asheboro, N.C., a small town in the faltering textile belt. At a strip mall, she meets with about two dozen high school students of Hispanic descent. She asks how many were born in North Carolina. About two third said they were. “How many of you consider yourselves Southerners?” she asked. The group looked confused.

Indeed, North Carolina has the fastest growing immigrant population in the country as foreign-born workers flock to its farm fields and poultry plants among other jobs. This is not a new thing.  My parents lived for years in a small Eastern N.C. town where my dad had a medical practice. They had been there since the 1960s and although outsiders, they were very much a part of the community. Being North Carolina (unlike snooty Richmond), it wasn’t hard being accepted. Starting in the 1980s, so many Hispanic newcomers started coming that the Catholic Church added a Spanish Mass. When Dad died in 2004, his funeral service was said by a priest from Colombia.

North Carolina may be more welcoming but other Southern states are reeling from immigrants calling them “freeloaders, gangbangers and anchor babies,” Thompson writes. Virginia, notably Prince William County and Atty. Gen. Ken Cuccinelli, has dabbled with anti-Hispanic laws requiring citizen checks whenever they are stopped. This was the case in Alabama, which ended up badly embarrassed by the rousting of foreign-looking people. It turned out that the very first person pulled over after the Alabama law went into effect was “a German-born Mercedes-Benz executive,” Thompson writes. The German carmaker, which had been recruited vigorously by Alabama officials, builds Mercedes SUVs at the town of Vance.

The tension between older residents and newer ones isn’t the only question. Thompson takes us to dying towns in the Mississippi Delta that are still thriving in an agricultural sense thanks to massive, two-story-high tractors. People, however, are fleeing, despite attempts to play the tourism card and erect museums to blues musicians.

She gives us a good chapter on her hometown of Atlanta, which had started to boom after World War II when it beat out Birmingham for a huge new airport.  Atlanta has its problems – an overweening inferiority complex, an over-eagerness to please, far too many cars and bad planning and chronic water shortages. But the city is an economic dynamo and does outclass other Southern cities such as Richmond, which could have been more like Atlanta under different, more enlightened leadership.

The author even gives us her thoughts on New Urbanism:

“. . .You could make a case that New Urbanism is not a radical idea at all, but a return to an older and more conservative past. If you think about it, the only significant design difference between a twenty-first century New Urbanist town and the 1930s-era Alabama town of “To Kill A Mockingbird” is the presence of a fiber-optic cable: both are founded on the ideas of neighborhoods where houses have front porches and sit close to the street, where ‘downtown’ is within walking distance and where there is enough commercial variety that only a few demands ever require a car.”

Despite the many changes, Thompson concludes that the “Southern” identity will never slip down the memory hole. She’s written a good book — not as good as the original and she doesn’t mention Cash nearly enough – but very worthwhile.

First, Fix Virginia’s Roads

by James A. Bacon

Virginia’s infrastructure rates a “D+” in the American Society of Civil Engineers’ 2013 report card on American infrastructure, released earlier this week. That’s a lousy rating in line with the national score of D+. The civil engineers have been accused of overstating the woes of American infrastructure in order to justify spending more money on projects that ultimately benefit… civil engineers. Be that as it may, there is some interesting data in the Virginia state report.

Here are two data points that caught my eye:

  • 9.1% — the percentage of bridges deemed structurally deficient.
  • 47% — the percentage of roads rated poor or mediocre quality

And a third: The average yearly cost to motorists in extra vehicle repairs and operating costs from driving on roads in need of repair is $254.

Bacon’s bottom line: The top priority of transportation policy should be to fully fund the maintenance of existing road, bridges, highways and rail before a single dime is spent upon new infrastructure. There is no excuse for allowing roads to deteriorate. First, poor roads impose a needless cost on drivers. Second, the more roads deteriorate, the more expensive they are to bring up to proper standards later. Letting transportation infrastructure to degrade creates a double whammy for citizens.

Official Virginia policy, embedded in the state code, requires the Virginia Department of Transportation to fully fund maintenance before undertaking new construction. And VDOT has abided by that policy… more or less. But there is a gray area. What standards of road and bridge conditions do we adhere to? Clearly, the current practice falls short of perfection — or 9.1% of our bridges would not be graded deficient nor would 47% of our roads be deemed poor or mediocre quality. If the civil engineers are to be believed, that slippage is costing Virginia drivers a fair amount of money for new tires and shock absorbers.

Now, compare that $254-per-year cost to what the typical driver has been paying in state gasoline taxes (17.5 cents per gallon). Assume the typical motorist drives 15,000 miles per year and gets 25 miles per gallon. He would buy 600 gallons of gasoline yearly and pay $105 yearly in state gasoline taxes.

Wow! The sub-par quality of roads and highways is costing motorists two-and-a-half times as much as what they pay in the gas tax! Talk about pennies wise and pounds foolish.

That brings me back to an old proposal: The gas tax should be set at whatever rate it takes to fully fund the maintenance of Virginia roads, bridges and highways at a high level of quality — no more, no less. Those tax revenues should be dedicated to maintenance and go to no other purpose. I believe that Virginians would be willing to pay a few pennies more per gallon in gas taxes if they were assured that the money was not being diverted to new construction of questionable value.

Such a tax would be easier to swallow if motorists could see the payoff in the form of smoother, safer rides resulting in fewer auto repairs. People are smart enough to know that if you pay to properly maintain the roads, they won’t pay as much to maintain their cars.

The problem with the old transportation funding policy, as well as the new one passed by the General Assembly last month, is that no one can see the connection between what they pay and what they get in return. Linking the gasoline tax to maintenance would make that link crystal clear for at least a portion of the road budget.

McAuliffe Pitches Jobs vs. Ideology

 By Peter Galuszka

“Fantastic,” says Terry McAuliffe as he listens to officials at the Culpeper, Va., campus of Germanna Community College talk about projects ranging from designing machine controls to a weight-loss competition. The tall, curly-haired McLean businessman — a Democrat who wants to be Virginia’s next governor — walks through a campus building while tossing out a barrage of questions and furiously taking notes. “I’m going to help with you with that, Ben,” he says to one teacher. “These community colleges are just jewels,” he remarks to another.

The visit to the Germanna campus, on which I tagged along in February, is part of McAuliffe’s effort to cast himself as a moderate jobs creator in a head-to-head campaign against firebrand Republican Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II. The off-year race is already attracting national attention as Republicans seek to turn the page from their drubbing in the 2012 elections. The media are watching closely to see how Cuccinelli will play his hand — how much will he tone down the rhetoric that’s made him a star on the right? — and a flood of out-of-state money is expected to flow to both candidates.

“My focus is all on economic development,” McAuliffe says flatly. “It’s job-creation, and that’s why I am touring every community college in Virginia. That is my focus — to bring mainstream, pro-business ideas. My opponent’s more into a social, ideological agenda.”

This bread-and-butter strategy is as obvious as it is essential. Early polls show the two candidates running neck and neck, but Cuccinelli has assets that could give him an edge: experience in state government and a better-known name. News this week that Republican Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling doesn’t have the cash to mount an independent bid only puts more pressure on McAuliffe to reach beyond the safely anti-Cuccinelli, Democratic base. University of Virginia analyst Larry Sabato and his colleagues noted that Bolling’s decision leaves the state with “two deeply flawed candidates” who “have limited positive appeal.”

McAuliffe indeed has baggage to overcome. In decisively losing the Democratic primary for governor in 2009 to underwhelming state Sen. Creigh Deeds, he was unable to shake off an image as a hard-charging Democratic Party operative and former fundraiser for Bill Clinton. More recently, the Connecticut-born banker-turned-entrepreneur has been criticized for locating a hybrid-car factory in Mississippi instead of Virginia — a story line that offers an obvious counterattack to his Virginia-jobs-first appeal.

McAuliffe clearly will have to contend again with accusations that he is a carpetbagger out of touch with Virginia’s problems. The Cuccinelli campaign played that card this month when it ridiculed McAuliffe for urging in a tweet from Florida that Virginia residents take care as snow approached. McAuliffe’s answer is to stress his Old Dominion ties: “My wife and I have lived in the same home in Northern Virginia for 21 years,” he says. “We have five children. I want our children to stay here and have jobs.”

This outsider problem may actually be less than meets the eye. Plenty of successful Virginia politicians did not grow up in the Old Dominion. One is none other than hugely popular Democrat Mark Warner, an Indiana-born entrepreneur who ran Douglas Wilder’s 1989 campaign for governor before becoming a successful governor himself and then a U.S. senator.

Warner’s brand of tech-savvy centrism clearly has not been lost on McAuliffe. As he steps through classrooms at Germanna, he regularly brings up Warner’s name. He also praises fellow Democrat Tim Kaine, another former governor who became a U.S. senator, and even Republican Gov. Robert F. McDonnell, as pro-business leaders. In contrast with Cuccinelli, McAuliffe backs McDonnell’s breakthrough with the General Assembly that produced the first real money for roads since 1986. “I’ve got to give Gov. McDonnell credit for keeping the discussion going,” he says.

The big question is whether identifying with practical politicians such as McDonnell will be enough to distance independents and moderate Republican voters — who might be turned off by McAuliffe’s deep history with the Democratic Party — from Cuccinelli and the tea party movement that stands with him.

Cuccinelli may be wondering the same thing. Lately, he seems to be avoiding inflammatory rhetoric (there was hardly a reference to gays, abortion or any other social flashpoint to be found in his recent book about constitutional federalism). He might be wise to stick to that approach. McAuliffe is clearly planning to pounce if Cuccinelli goes rogue.

“I always say the most important family value you can have is a job,” McAuliffe says at the end of his community college tour. “There’s a real difference between us, and we can’t be sending out signals with a social-ideological agenda that says that people aren’t wanted. We can’t divide people. We’ve got to unite them.”

(Note: This is article appears in the Local Opinions section of The Washington Post)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-frame-mcauliffe-wants-jobs-vs-ideology/2013/03/15/caf57a3e-8c11-11e2-9f54-f3fdd70acad2_story.html

The Dragas-Sullivan Battle at UVa Blazes On

By Peter Galuszka

It appears that the conflicts between Helen Dragas and Teresa Sullivan are far from over.

After all the brouhaha last summer between the head of the University of Virginia’s Board of Visitors and its president – a battle that got national attention and sparked lots of questions at universities around the country – not much appears to have been resolved.

Dragas engineered a coup against Sullivan last June only to be forced to reinstate her. Against plenty of opposition, Dragas herself was reinstated by the General Assembly.

It was probably naïve to expect peace “on Grounds” at the venerable school. Dragas recently marched in with a list of 65 goals for Sullivan (as if she needs help). The Association of American University Professors has bashed Dragas and the board in a report and now the UVa Faculty Senate is pushing back at a BOV request that it restate its confidence in them. “It doesn’t look like we’ll be able to do that by June,” says George Cohen, faculty senate chairman.

The AAUP was scathing in its assessment of the BOV and has recommended that the school’s accreditation feet get held to the fire so that matters can be resolved.

The national professors’ group diminished Dragas, owner of a construction firm in Hampton Roads, as out of her depth. She may know how to run a “successful, medium-sized enterprise” but she doesn’t have experience “with large complex organizations or the administration of higher education,” the AAUP writes.

The “headstrong” rector “imbued with a belief in ‘engaged trusteeship’ strove to remove a president who failed to conform to her image of academic captaincy,” says the AAUP, adding that Dragas didn’t really give Sullivan a chance to understand what the criticisms against her were.

The heart of the issue seems to be how the BOV is set up. As I have blogged before, it is unusually business-heavy, which is usually the way things are done in Virginia. The AAUP, an advocacy group for faculty, says a voting or non-voting faculty member should be added to the board and that board members should be better trained.  Lots of other schools have something like this, notably Harvard.

In Virginia, there remains a Southern mentality that traces back to plantation days or to its older corporations where top-down authority is considered sacrosanct and mere “workers” really have no right to say anything. They are lucky to have a job. After all, Virginia’s elite loves to make note of its anti-union “right to work” laws designed to keep the rank and file in line.

A business-heavy BOV cannot but help perpetuate and extend this thinking which is only getting stronger as a camp that wants to privatize UVA keeps the pot bubbling.

Meanwhile, no one has really gotten to the bottom of what happened last year and why. There are unanswered questions about the influence of wealthy hedge fund managers who wielded influence their way. Also, why is U.S. Sen. Mark Warner so helpful to Dragas? Where does Gov. Robert F. McDonnell stand? We sure know where Ken Cuccinelli stands and he could be the next governor.

A danger is that U.Va., known for the diversity of its academic and research offerings, will get chopped back to a curriculum heavy on STEM (science, engineering, math and technology) which has been the fad among economic developers and the chattering business classes for the past few years. A couple of decades ago, it was all about “globalization” and reading Thomas Friedman’s books. Now we have to produce super engineers to keep up with the Chinese.

Problem is, since there are no real faculty members on the BOV, the business-oriented people are stuck reading the op-ed pages of The Wall Street Journal where the thinking tends to be a tad yesterday’s. This is apparently where Dragas and her cohorts somehow got the idea that UVa. was out of step with the  online course craze.

One theory I’ve heard is that the business folks want to make sure that UVa. has researchers who are clearly in the corporate pocket, unlike Michael Mann, the former UVa climatologist who has become quite controversial with his ideas on mankind’s impact on climate change. They just don’t fly with conservatives who doubt global warming and want more corporate research money to flow.

Does someone have to pay the price? If so, doesn’t that defeat the purpose of even having a university?

Virginia Students Do It Faster

Less Animal House, more graduating on time.

No one has accused me of cutting Virginia’s institutions of higher education any slack, but I do give credit where credit is due. And now is such a time: Our public universities do a superior job of making sure not only that students graduate, but graduate within reasonably quickly.

According to a new report by the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center, the average six-year graduation rate for students starting at a four-year public institution in Virginia was 76.35% — the highest of any state save New Hampshire and Iowa.

Said Governor Bob McDonnell in a press release: “This report highlights the impressive work that our institutions of higher education are doing to assist Virginians in college competition and retention. I commend our colleges and universities on their efforts to increase these completion rates and help the Commonwealth meet the goals of the Top Jobs legislation of an additional 100,000 new degrees.”

Nice to see a bit of good news. While the higher ed sector may be institutionally corrupt nationally, putting its own interests ahead of its students, that seems not to be the case with Virginia’s public colleges and universities. Our public institutions still need to reform themselves — tuitions are still too expensive, costs are still too high, and online education still looms as a competitive threat — but they have fouled their nests less than their peers in other states. Congratulations!

– JAB

The Lessons of the 2013 General Assembly

By Peter Galuszka

If there’s any good news from the 2013 General Assembly session, it is that the hard right’s strange hold on taxation has been broken. Republicans can start acting like responsible adults once again instead of dogmatic shills or spoiled children.

Gov. Robert F. Donnell and legislators found a way to raise badly needed money for transportation although it came via a very bad law that ties itself up like a contortionist doing this and that when all that needed to be done was to simply raise the gasoline tax for the first time in 26 years.

The Democrats were right to strong-arm McDonnell into going along with expanding Medicaid. It would have been absolutely ridiculous for Virginia to hold its stubborn head high and deny thousands of needy people medical assistance so they can feel good about some ludicrous oath from Grover Norquist they may have recited at one point to get votes. The feds will be paying for the expansion until 2016 and then for 90 percent of it. Imagine a well fed delegate saying, “No, you poor person can’t have health care because it is doctrinally impure!”

The upshot is is that we need to get of the Grover Norquists, the Tea Baggers and all their ilk to get on with the serious business of running the state and country. The sequestration debacle is more than embarrassing for its stupidity. So is Kenneth Cuccinelli with Bob Marshall cheering him to to find any bogus constitutional challenge to anything he finds political impure as far as taxation.

The bottom line is that if you want fixed roads, good schools and a decent place to live, you have to pay for them through taxes. Simple. You can’t depend on private industry to see you through, especially not when a good chunk of it in the Old Dominion is actually federal government money that’s about to be cut off in a big way. You can’t do it through little shell games with public private partnerships to build roads you often do not need. And you just can’t kick the can to younger generations so you can remain holy.

In other words, the days of the Tea Party, “Boomergeddon” and all the clarion calls to the need for budget cutting are over. They’ve been over for a while. We get it. We’ve been spending too much. But it is idiotic to go cold turkey without some thought given to it because you will crash the economy and die of the DTs. You don’t cure a crash victim by denying him blood. That’s not voodoo economics, that’s vampire economics. You need a balance and that’s exactly what the Boomergeddons and Baconauts want to deny us.

As for McDonnell, well, he’s finally got his legacy. It looks pretty messy. He did manage to get more money for roads, but he did through a Rube Goldberg contraption of taxation. He has a totally wrong-headed tax on alternative vehicles which shows,once again, just how Neanderthal much of the thinking in the General Assembly is.

McDonnell failed to get legacies through privatizing state alcohol stores or erecting offshore oil rigs. Last year, the legislature got so out of control with social conservative nonsense — another Tea Party legacy — that Virginia scored on national Snark TV for its inane war against women. That cost McDonnell a hell of a lot, namely the vice presidential nomination.

Now, he’s reportedly thinking about something bigger and I gather his platform for that will be his tax victory. Good Luck.

Empowering College Students with Better Consumer Data

There is a big move afoot in Congress to make salary information of college graduates more readily available to the public. The idea is to give students a realistic idea of how much they can expect to earn when they apply to a school that will cost them $100,000 or up in tuition and fees. “This begins to introduce some market forces into the academic arena that have not been there,” Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, told the Wall Street Journal.

The idea enjoys bipartisan support. Increasing transparency is a priority of the Obama administration, and House Whip Eric Cantor, R-7th, says he intends to introduce a similar bill in the House. Now, here’s what’s really amazing: Virginia is the first state in the nation to make this data available. We’re ahead of everyone else!

Now that I’ve given our dear Old Dominion a pat on the back for being leader of the pack, let me introduce a word of caution. The WSJ issues some  caveats : “The state data have shortcomings. Paychecks for the same job can vary widely by location. Salary data don’t reflect self-employed graduates or those who work for the U.S. government or move to another state.

It’s useful to know that you have a good shot at making more money if you graduate from George Mason University than any other public university in the state. But that information, by itself, is only of limited utility. If most GMU graduates stay in the Northern Virginia area, they might be making more… but their cost of living might be a whole lot higher. Also, graduates of the most recruited academic programs — take Virginia Tech’s engineering school, for instance — typically take jobs outside the state. If many of Tech’s best-compensated grads aren’t counted because they end up outside Virginia, the average earnings figure would be artificially depressed.

Despite the limitations, publishing the data takes us in the right direction. It makes college students better consumers of educational services and it puts college and university administrations on notice that people aren’t going to accept business as usual very much longer.

– JAB

Cuccinelli visits UVa and evades the issues

Road trip!  Gubernatorial candidate, Attorney General and budding author Ken Cuccinelli visited the University of Virginia this week at the invitation of well known professor Larry Sabato.  Reports from those on the scene indicate that Mr. Cuccinelli spent most of his time dancing around the issues rather than presenting any coherent plans.

Just say maybe.  Asked about the possibility of Virginia legalizing marijuana, Cuccinell had this to say, “I’m not sure about Virginia’s future [in terms of marijuana legalization], but I and a lot of people are watching Colorado and Washington to see how it plays out.” How enlightening.  In the spirit of colleges and multiple choice tests, let’s see if we can help Mr. Cuccinelli organize his thoughts.  Mr. Cuccinelli, please select either a) or b) – “I a) support, b) oppose a ballot initiative for Virginians to decide whether marijuana should be legalized in the state.” Please note, there is no option to pick “both” or “none of the above” for this question.

In a glass house with a bag of rocks.  Having said exactly nothing in response to the question of legalizing marijuana Mr. Cuccinelli moved onto the matter of economic development.  From the Cavalier Daily article, “Cuccinelli criticized Virginia gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe, the likely Democratic nominee. He said McAuliffe had failed to take a strong stance on economic policy.  ’In my opponent’s economic proposals he’s talked more about taxes,’ Cuccinelli said. ‘When the economy is in the kind of state it is in, we want to be careful with that.’  Cuccinelli thinks McAuliffe has failed to take a strong stand on economic development? One assumes that Cuccinelli must have a strong position on this matter.  Apparently not.  A visit to the Cuccinelli for Governor web site brings us to the Issues tab.  That tab has the following categories:  The Constitution and Liberty, Healthcare, Life, Immigration, Taxes & Spending, 2nd Amendment.  It seems economic policy didn’t make the cut of major issues for Mr. Cuccinelli.  Maybe there’s something under Taxes & Spending?  ”As Governor, Ken will continue to support a free market environment for starting and growing business in the Commonwealth, including using his political influence to fight tax increases.”  Free market good, taxes bad.  That’s it?  Time for a “yes” or “no” question.  Mr. Cuccinelli, if you were Governor right now would you veto the proposed legislation allowing jurisdictions in Tideater and NoVa to impose up to a 1% income tax without a voter referendum?  Again, Mr. Cuccinelli, that’s either “yes” or “no”.

Mann oh Mann.  Mr. Cuccinelli, an alumnus of the University of Virginia, visited the University of Virginia and “forgot” to mention his two year legal battle against the University of Virginia in regard to Prof. Michael Mann’s research at the University of Virginia.  Perhaps Mr. Cuccinelli should have tied a ribbon around his finger to help him remember his nationally reported legal battle with the university he was visiting. Mr. Cuccinelli, if you ever address a LGBT group you may need all of your fingers for ribbons.

Motherhood, apple pie and college tuition.  Again, from the Cavalier Daily article, “One concern I have is pricing higher education out of the reach of middle class families,” Cuccinelli said. “Making sure students can access an education … and that’s tied into financial stability.”  That’s super helpful, Ken.  Heck, people might vote for you based on that pithy and insightful comment alone.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.  Ken Cuccinelli’s campaign to date has been a train wreak.  He’s refused to honor thirty years of precedent by resigning from his position as Attorney General in order to campaign for governor.  He’s publishing a book that, among other things, takes public swimming pools to task for competing with private physical fitness enterprises (page 240).  Now, he’s bumbling across the state belching great gusts of hot air rather than saying anything concrete about his position on the issues affecting Virginians.  Cuccinelli is widely reported to be a shrewd, brilliant and cunning politician.  So far, he seems a lot more like the Great and Powerful Oz than the savior of the Republican Party.

DJ Rippert