Good Enough For Government Work

The Minneapolis Star Tribune committed a random act of journalism over the weekend, publishing an extensive post-mortem of the MNsure debacle.  The state’s newspaper of record published a detailed account of what went wrong and who did what in the rollout of Minnesota’s Obamacare health insurance exchange.  It is must reading for anyone interested in state government or health care.

One thing made clear by the Star Tribune’s reporting is that the senior members of state government—from Governor Mark Dayton on down—were aware that MNsure’s rollout would be a disaster, decided to press ahead anyway, and were indifferent, at best, to the ensuing carnage.

It’s the cliché “good enough for government work” come to life.  Having twice served as a government bureaucrat, I’ve always found the phrase to be mildly insulting.  Mark Dayton seems to wear the insult as a badge of honor.

Gov. Dayton gives away the game in this quote published by the Star Tribune,

“I don’t know of anybody who wasn’t operating with good intentions and trying their utmost to make this as good as possible.”

Hey, they tried their best and they meant well.  With Gov. Dayton, good intentions always trump actual results.  He’d rather have his people mean well, and fail, than succeed for the wrong reasons.

Which explains why Dayton has held no one—not the hapless Commissioner of Human Services nor the “hear no evil, see no evil” MNsure board of directors responsible for this debacle.

Priorities

As summer was drawing to a close, questions were being raised about funding for the controversial new Vikings stadium.  The oversight committee, the Legislative Commission on Minnesota Sports Facilities, hadn’t met in four months.

Back on September 10^th, a “frustrated” State Representative, Joe Atkins (D-Inver Grove Heights), ran to the Channel 5 TV cameras and demanded that the Commission meet.

Last night on Channel 5, State Senator Sean Nienow (R-Cambridge) was wondering why another legislative oversight committee hasn’t met over the last four months.  The MNsure Oversight Committee, co-chaired by Rep. Atkins, hasn’t held a meeting since September 24^th. 

MNsure, Minnesota’s local branch of Obamacare, has lurched from disaster to catastrophe since its shaky October 1^st start—even while top state government healthcare officials vacation together in tropical Costa Rica.

By their actions you shall know them

The Vikings get the headlines, but MNsure’s troubles will have a larger impact on the economy and the public health of the state.  More Minnesotans have lost insurance coverage than gained it in the 3½ months since the health insurance exchange launched.  Oversight has been non-existent.  Indeed, Atkins’ committee is not scheduled to meet again until January.  Strange priorities.

The Banana Republic of Minnesota: All Things Considered

[In this post, I outline the basics of the MNsure/MPR relationship.  In the next post, I will outline my objections.]

Thanks to the keen hearing of John Gilmore this morning, I was alerted to a curious radio relationship.  I confirmed with the staff of Minnesota Public Radio (MPR) that the state government agency MNsure is a sponsor of MPR’s news programming.  To be clear, when you hear a 15-second ad on MPR news, you are not hearing a public service announcement; you are hearing a paid (cash) advertisement for a program sponsor.

The Banana Republic of Minnesota: After Action Report

I attended a meeting of the MNsure Board of Directors this afternoon in St. Paul.  I do not recommend the experience to others.  MNsure is the state government agency overseeing the start up of Minnesota’s Obamacare health insurance exchange.  MNsure’s Board is the body that is supposed to be overseeing the agency.  As Board members themselves were quick to point out, they neither have nor will they exercise any such authority.  It turns out that the buck stops…well, it never stops.

Mark Dayton, Libertarian Reformer? I Don't Think So

We have seventeen months to go before the 2014 elections, which means that the contest is well under way.

Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton, a progressive Democrat, is running for re-election as a…libertarian reformer.  At least that’s what the infinitely credulous reporters at the Minneapolis Star Tribune claim.

Page B-3 of Sunday’s paper includes a “hot dish politics” column that discusses Dayton’s re-election plans.  The governor just signed into law the largest budget in the state’s history and the largest tax increase in the state’s industry, and approved the removal of such reforms as the sunset commission, teacher testing, and student testing.

We Need a Reform Conservatism

Ross Douthat, the New York Times’ only conservative columnist, posted a helpful piece today on “What Is Reform Conservatism?  An agenda for an almost-movement.”

I met Ross a few weeks ago when he was in town to give a talk on his latest book, before a packed house.  I think he is someone we should be listening to.

Ross concedes in his post today that the idea of reform conservatism “has not exactly caught fire within the G.O.P.”  When you are fighting against the daily catastrophes brought on by one-party rule—as we are in Minnesota—or the too-many-scandals-too-count in Washington, it’s tough to look longer term at ideas worth implementing when (not if) we are back in power.

I’m optimistic that—in Minnesota—we may be back in 2014, so now is the time for building a consensus around a positive agenda for change in state government.

Last month I made a few suggestions to get started on a reform agenda for Minnesota.  Today, Ross offers a six point agenda that is useful as a starting point for discussions.  I wish he would have included a point on education reform (as I did) but that is more a quibble than a criticism.

More useful for the idea of establishing a conservative reform agenda are the two premises Ross’ articulates as underlying his thinking on the subject.

First, Ross discusses the need for “making family life more affordable, upward mobility more likely, and employment easier to find.”

Second, Ross names that the biggest hurdle to making that happen,

The existing welfare-state institutions we’ve inherited from the New Deal and the Great Society, however, often make these tasks harder rather than easier:  Their exploding costs crowd out every other form of spending

I’ve made exactly that same point before.  You would think that we would share common ground with those on the other side of the fence who genuinely want to help the needy.  The No. 1 reason why there is not more money to help the neediest?  Because of the huge share of our budget devoted to programs that we know don’t work.

Ross’ conclusion,

So we don’t face a choice between streamlining the welfare state and making it more supportive of work and family; we should be doing both at once.

Just as important are the items that Ross lists that should not be part of a conservative reform agenda:  no cap and trade, no more tax increases, etc.

I agree with the idea that we need something of a conservative reform movement.  Let’s get started.

Reaching the Low Information Voter, Part 1

With the 2013 legislative session now behind us, the 2014 election campaign can begin in earnest.  With major elections set for Governor, U.S. Senator, and the state House of Representatives, Minnesota’s voters have the opportunity to change the direction of the state’s politics for the third time in four years.

For the state’s Democrats, now enjoying one-party rule in St. Paul, the election is theirs to lose.  Thus the focus will inevitably fall on the Republicans’ response to the opportunity before them.   Already, there is no shortage of advice, coming from all points on the political compass.

Governing and Legislating

The Wall Street Journal's James Taranto makes a good point in his column today, in quoting Time's Joe Klein,

"Democrats tend to be more interested in legislating than in managing."

Others Act While We Lament on Higher Education

Back in 2011, Texas Governor Rick Perry proposed the $10,000 bachelor degree.  In late 2012, Florida Governor Rick Scott picked up the challenge for his state.

Across the country, Massive Open On-line Courses are shaking up higher education and setting a new price point: zero.

Back in Minnesota, an early contender for higher education headline of the year is “Dayton, Franken lament high cost of college,” Minnesota Public Radio reports,

The two Democrats said students are graduating with too much debt and that federal and state aid to help people go to college needs to be increased.

So while other states are experimenting with new business models to replace the increasingly antiquated guild structure, our Ivy League-educated brain trust is trying to further inflate higher education bubble.  Another opportunity for reform goes begging.

A Reform Agenda for Minnesota

In the five months since the last election, Republicans in Minnesota (and across the nation) have been trying to figure out what comes next.  Consensus has formed around such items s the need for better organization, better use of technology, and the need for better “messaging.”  No doubt.  But what “message”?  My suggestion for a message would emphasize an agenda for state government reform built around performance and accountability.

The DFL majorities in the state legislature and our DFL Governor Mark Dayton have proposed budgets with $ billions in new taxes and $ billions in new spending.  These unsustainable increases in state government come with no strings attached:  government is not being asked to reform or modernize its operations in the least.

A good place to start is right at the top.  The cabinet of the Governor of Virginia, for example, includes 15 members, counting the Chief of Staff,  his senior policy advisor and a “Chief Jobs Creation Officer” (the Lt. Governor)—to serve a state of more than 8 million people.

The Governor’s cabinet in Minnesota includes 26 members.  Adding in the Lt. Governor, the Governor’s chief of staff, and his senior policy advisor would bring the Minnesota total to 29, for a state of less than 5.4 million people.  Indeed, President Obama’s cabinet consists of only 16 members, including the Vice President and the Attorney General.  Clearly, we have some room for agency consolidation in Minnesota.

Moving around boxes on an organization chart won’t solve Minnesota’s chronic budget problems.  Those cabinet officers are confirmed by the state Senate under the “advice and consent” clause, but accountability tends to end there.  A mechanism for the ongoing review of executive branch manager performance—while in office—by the legislature would help reinforce the idea of accountability for results and accountability to the people.

Making the Grade

Taking that idea one step further, each state agency and each state program funded with tax dollars should undergo an annual review and receive a letter grade.  Much of what takes place under the banner of state government occurs within programs and projects, each having rather narrow missions and a specific set of responsibilities.  Each such division should be reviewed and graded.

Letter grades would be based on management of state resources, fulfillment of mission, and achievement of numerical goals.  Merely existing for another year will not earn a passing grade.

As you may recall from the college fraternity movie Animal House, the Delta chapter president boasted of his house’s “long tradition of existence both to its members and the community at large.”  More will be asked of state government.

If you are a state government program begun in the 1970’s (or earlier) either you (1) have accomplished your mission and should be wound down, (2) need significant reform to accomplish your mission, or (3) must acknowledge that your goal will never be accomplished.

Going into this annual review process, there should be an expectation that some programs will be discontinued, some agencies will be merged with others, and some managers will be let go.  Minnesota taxpayers can no longer afford to provide more money with no additional accountability.

Caveat Adsiduus

Accountability to the legislature is one thing, but it is only a substitute for accountability to the people.  Businesses routinely offer money back guarantees for their services, but with government, it’s always caveat emptor.  But with government, we don’t have a choice of whether or not to emptum.

We no longer seem to report on which Minnesota public schools are officially “failing.”  But there can be no doubt that some schools are failing our children.  For this small percentage, state government should pledge to those parents and children:  any child stuck in a failing school can be transferred to a better school within a year.  Minnesota’s nation-leading achievement gap means that another generation of children is in danger of falling behind.

These ideas will surely improve over time and more discussion, but the time has come for government to be accountable.

The Strange Allure of Senseless Legislating

One of the bills that I have been following at the Minnesota legislature this session, S.F. 280, would allow private employees of a certain labor union to join the Minnesota state government public pension system.  Supporters of the bill claim that somehow this would not impose any costs on Minnesota taxpayers.

The St. Paul Pioneer Press ran a story on the bill, which includes one of the most remarkable exchanges I have ever read between a reporter and a legislator,

When asked for the rationale behind the bill, [State Sen. Sandra] Pappas acknowledged that she didn't know.  "I guess no one's ever asked me, 'What's the rationale?' I wasn't even thinking of it being the union employees," Pappas said.”

I now wonder how many bills are introduced with the author having no idea of the rationale behind them.  Perhaps the very act of legislating without thought provides a certain frisson to the unwitting lawmaker—adding a little element of danger to an otherwise dull occupation.

But if there is no particular rationale to adding these private employees of a private employer, why not give all Minnesotans the chance to join?

The Nordic Model

The current issue of The Economist magazine includes a special report looking at the success of the Nordic countries in introducing some market discipline into their social welfare states.  Perhaps a model for our Nordic state of Minnesota?

Follow the Money and TakeAction! Part 4

[This post is the fourth in a series examining the activity of the St. Paul-based political charity TakeAction Minnesota.  Parts 1, 2, and 3 of the series provide some necessary background to those new to the story.]

In Part 3 of the series, I traced some of the money flowing into the TakeAction non-profit organization(s) from out-of-state sources.  This Part 4 will serve as an introduction to TakeAction’s lobbying operation.

Noted in Part 3, the mega-philanthropy Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) of Princeton, New Jersey (think Johnson’s “no more tears’ baby shampoo), has donated $1.6 million to TakeAction’s 501(c)(3) charitable Education Fund unit since 2008.  $1.4 million of this amount was earmarked to support TakeAction’s work in state healthcare policy.

Who Stands Accountable For Homelessness

Today the Minneapolis Star Tribune reported on growing homelessness in the state's largest county.  The paper writes,

"Despite numerous public and private programs that spend millions of dollars confronting homelessness, some of which have had marked success, new figures show the number of people with nowhere to live continues to grow."

Adding,

"Despite the increases in homelessness, local advocates point to some positive developments, driven by a 10-year campaign to end homelessness that was launched five years ago."

In my perpetually forthcoming book, I use that very 10-year plan as Exhibit A of what is wrong with state government.  As I wrote back in March 2012,

U-M Admin Bloat Gets Bloatier

Of late, I have pursued a sideline of following the local media's coverage (or lack of same) regarding the University of Minnesota's nation-leading administrative bloat.  (See 1, 2, 3, and 4)

It all began with a Wall Street Journal front-page exposé that ran before New Year's.  The Journal cited our flagship public university as Exhibit A in what I would characterize as a fin de siècle bout of overhead spending right before the higher education bubble bursts.

When in Doubt, TakeAction! Part 1

When I Googled the phrase “money and politics” the other day, one of the top hits that appeared was this page on Bill Moyers' website.  It contains the usual screed against big corporate money and the Citizens United decision.  If you click on any of the links there, you will read about the usual bogeymen of the left:  the Koch brothers, the oil companies, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), etc.

I find all of this stuff to be remarkable, because as I go about my day-to-day involvement in Minnesota politics, all of the “big money” that I see is on the other side of the aisle and coming out of non-profit corporations.
 

I Guess the Pulitzer Will Have to Wait

The Minneapolis Star Tribune seems determined to prove me right.  On Friday, I noted that the paper had finally taken notice in its news pages of the controversy surrounding the University of Minnesota’s nation-leading administrative bloat.  I pointed out the more prominent treatment of a nothing story concerning locally-mined sand (frac sand) used in the oil drilling industry.

In today’s Sunday edition of the Star Tribune, both issues appear in the Opinion Exchange section.  The second page (OP 2) contains an in-house editorial on the  U's admin bloat.  This editorial is literally wrapped in a massive report on frac sand, which covers most of pages OP1 and OP4.  The frac sand piece comes complete with two color photographs, two pull quotes, and a text box.

U-M Admin Bloat: Better Late Than Never

The controversy surrounding the University of Minnesota’s administrative bloat finally spilled over onto the news pages of the Minneapolis Star Tribune, nearly two weeks after the Wall Street Journal published a front page exposé on the University’s national-leading administrative overstaffing.

To date, the controversy had played out only on the Op-Ed pages of Minnesota’s leading daily, with dueling pieces appearing from a Washington Post columnist and the president of Minnesota’s flagship public university, Eric Kaler.

James Buchanan, RIP

We lost a titan this week.  Nobel-prize winning economist James Buchanan died at age 93.  He was one of the founders of Public Choice Theory and taught for a time at my alma mater (alas, before my time).

The Wall Street Journal includes two [1, 2] tributes to the man and his work in today's editorial/opinion pages.

For an explanation of Public Choice Theory in his own words, read Buchanan's Politics Without Romance.  This Buchanan quote sums it up,

"In a very real sense, public choice became a set of theories of governmental failures, as an offset to the theories of market failures that had previously emerged from theoretical welfare economics."

The Bloated Public University Bureaucracy

In a must-read expose this past weekend, the Wall Street Journal examined the level of administrative bloat at the University of Minnesota.  By the Journal's reckoning, based on U.S Department of Education data, our state University is the most bloated large research university in the nation.

To be fair, the Journal detailed efforts of the current University President, Eric Kaler, and his immediate predecessor, Robert Bruininks, to reduce the bureaucracy at the state's flagship institution of higher education.  The biggest hurdle to reform was the lack of good data on administrative costs.  As one version of the old saw goes, you can't manage what you don't measure.