December 1-6, 2013
Dec 01 08:11 Affordable Care Act will fail Dec 01 09:57 Obama's mission accomplished moment Dec 02 06:35 HealthCare.gov: still a failure Dec 05 02:08 Calling out Chancellor Rosenstone Dec 05 11:16 Westrom announces congressional candidacy Dec 06 01:39 Rep. Davids to Gov. Dayton: Fix MnSure first Dec 06 09:51 Using Pelosi's words against Democrats Dec 06 13:37 SCSU dragging MnSCU universities down Dec 06 17:35 St. Cloud Times ignorance is showing
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Affordable Care Act will fail
Greg Gutfeld's column offers the perfect explanation why the Affordable Care Act, aka the ACA, is destined for failure. Mr. Gutfeld starts by highlighting what iTunes would look like if it was a government invention:
Now imagine if iTunes had been run by the government. This is how I see it:
To enjoy my recently repurchased Marshall Crenshaw's song "What Do You Dream Of", I'd have to pay for an additional 19 songs I do not want, in order to help pay for someone else's desire to listen to Ke$ha. Or worse, Enya. The iPod would come with a mandated airbag, and it would be the size of a baby's head, and weigh 45 lbs. It would require that 34 percent of the music I purchase be polka. It would probably start overheating after an hour of use, break down, and give you thyroid cancer.
But as a reasonably compensated guy, the government believes that my desires for my music would require purchasing other music I don't want, and I'd have to subsidize the musical choices belonging to some old guy I don't even know.
And chances are all the music would suck (think Dave Matthews and Maroon 5). It would all cost more and satisfy less, which is what happens when choice is replaced by coercion.
That's essentially what the ACA requires. This isn't pie-in-the-sky. Those are the principles behind the ACA. Young healthies are essential to the equation because their overpaying pays for older, less healthy enrollees. Then Gutfeld explains why it's destined for failure:
My point: just as civilization is moving toward an endless fragmentation allowing for options beyond our wildest expectations, President Obama believes the opposite course is "the right thing to do.' It is his warped version of progress. It's no different than a young man staring at the advances in medicine and thinking, "No thanks, I'll take the newt's tail and onion powder for my cancer." Ancient Chinese secrets no longer are acceptable medicine, except with Obamacare, what's retro is now progress.
It's like choosing to eat raw meat even when you know fire's been invented and works reasonably well under certain circumstances. That's what Obama is doing. He's staring at a Ferrari V4i, and thinking, "No thanks, I'll take this penny-farthing."
There's no questioning that world is going megachoice. President Obama's 'reform' relies on limiting choice. By definition, the ACA is a dead man walking. The choice movement is the irresistible force. For all of this administration's efforts to fix HealthCare.gov, the ACA's biggest flaw is that it limits appealing choices.
So, you can be depressed over Obamacare, because it's worth being depressed about. But it can't win. Not against the human, creative mind and its desire for options. Sooner or later it will collapse, and then people will have the freedom to choose -- the way health care should have been from the start.
It isn't a question of whether the ACA will collapse. The only questions still to be answered are when will it collaps and how much destruction will it cause before it collapses. Charles Krauthammer wisely stated that anything that can't be sustained won't be.
Posted Sunday, December 1, 2013 8:11 AM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 01-Dec-13 09:32 AM
I am becoming very worried about how we get back to the quality, availability and price of our current system in the wake of O'care's inevitable demise. It will never "fail" because the Democrats and the media will never, ever admit to that possibility. It will simply become untenable and drag on until we elect enough Republicans to flat out kill the thing. The concern I have is how long that will take and how much destruction will be left behind.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 01-Dec-13 10:18 AM
There's no question that some destruction will happen. That said, the longer Democrats & the media (pardon the repetition) maintain that things are fine, the more distrust they'll heap on themselves.
What's important to note is that the American people don't trust Democrats on this anymore. They don't agree with Republicans but that's a different hurdle.
Regaining a person's trust is infinitely more difficult than modifying policies.
Comment 3 by walter hanson at 01-Dec-13 11:37 AM
Gary:
I think it's easy for the Republicans to regain the trust, but the problem is until 2017 when we will have a Republican President to sign reform bills and for the Republican Senate to pass the bills they can't do anything except being criticizing the bill and proposing reforms that won't go anywhere.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Response 3.1 by Gary Gross at 01-Dec-13 05:09 PM
That's fine. We can't change certain things. It's time to think of what we'll do when we can make more significant changes. Do what you can when you can.
Obama's mission accomplished moment
Last week, I spotted a headline that said the Obama administration didn't want to make a Bush-like "Mission Accomplished" statement. I wish I would've copied that link because the Obama administration appears to have made their own "Mission Accomplished" statement :
HealthCare.gov team claims victory: 'We have met the goal'
That's a self-serving statement if ever I heard one. What goal was met? Was the goal a political goal? If yes, was it also a policy goal? More importantly, who set that goal? Most importantly, is it a goal that the American people are satisfied with?
Based on this document, I suspect that the answer to that last question will be an emphatic no:
The most telling statement is on the last page:
As the metrics detailed in this report reveal, dramatic progress has been made on improving HealthCare.gov. There is more work to be done to continue to improve and enhance the website and continue to improve the consumer experience in the weeks and months ahead. The new management system and instrumentation have helped improve site stability, lower the error rating below 1%, increase capacity to allow 50,000 concurrent users to simultaneously use the site and will help drive continuous improvement on the site. While we strive to innovate and improve our outreach and systems for reaching consumers, we believe we have met the goal of having a system that will work smoothly for the vast majority of users.
This sentence says everything about what a mess HealthCare.gov is:
There is more work to be done to continue to improve and enhance the website and continue to improve the consumer experience in the weeks and months ahead .
In other words, HealthCare.gov has improved but it's still a gigantic mess. That isn't what patients who've lost their insurance want to hear. Again, we return to question whose goals were met.
Having the administration say that HealthCare.gov has significantly improved in the first sentence, then admitting there's months of of work still ahead on the last page of a document, won't build the American people's confidence.
This morning on Fox News Sunday, Brit Hume talked about visiting HealthCare.gov in Virginia where he lives. He said that there weren't any platinum plans available through HealthCare.gov, though he later said that there was a platinum plan available through e-Surance.com. Mr. Hume later noted that HealthCare.gov was nothing like the experience one expects from Amazon.com or other similar sites. Mr. Hume finished by declaring that "this website is still a mess."
The Obama administration might be satisfied with the progress made on HealthCare.gov but they don't get to cast the deciding vote on what's successful. The American people cast that vote and, based on recent polling, they aren't impressed.
Posted Sunday, December 1, 2013 9:57 AM
No comments.
HealthCare.gov: still a failure
Philip Klein's blistering article highlights the administration's happy talk as BS. This information is particularly illuminating:
For instance, an HHS chart, which Zients boasted about, shows system uptime now at 95.1 percent (excluding scheduled maintenance), which compares to 42.9 percent a month ago. But, the industry standard is for websites to be available for users 99.9 percent of the time. Anything below that is considered a failure and 95.1 percent is a disaster.
A 2012 study by web monitoring firm Panopta that looked at the performance of 130 major retailers' websites from January to August 2012 found that the lowest uptime rate was 99.34 percent.
Another study by web performance firm Pingdom that looked at retail websites during the 2011 holiday shopping season, found that nearly half of the websites (such as Amazon and eBay) were up 100 percent of the time. The lowest performing was Foot Locker, which was at 98.573 percent.
A 95.1 percent uptime means that over the course of a year, a website would be down for about 18 days. Alternatively, imagine what a disaster it would be for sales if, during the holiday shopping season, Amazon's website were down for about a day and a half, excluding scheduled maintenance.
Brit Hume has a unique perspective on HealthCare.gov, which he explained here :
CHRIS WALLACE: Having said that, Brit, don't they have a lot riding on how this goes, the next few weeks?
BRIT HUME, FOX NEWS SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Of course. I think the website is a little better. We were on it yesterday, just to see what, you know, might be out there, what might be available. The site works better. You can get through and check plans.
It's not going to remind you anytime soon of Amazon.com or eBay, but it's in the clunky sort of way it works. In the state of Virginia, which we were, where we live, we were seeing what might be available to, that might be comparable to the wonderful plan we have here at Fox, and there was, there were plans available from exactly one company.
The best plan available, for my wife, had, we tried to see how many of her doctors were covered by, included in the plan, zero.
Now, that's one person. Many others will have a different experience, those who get subsidies are likely to do well under this, but I think there are going to be continuing complaints and problems going forward, pretty serious ones.
This sentence is the sentence by which everything should be judged:
It's not going to remind you anytime soon of Amazon.com or eBay.
As Philip Klein stated earlier, Amazon's website is functioning perfectly 100% of the time during the Christmas season. This is the insurance companies' busiest time of the year, too. Democrats have tried convincing people that health insurance prices have flattened because of the ACA. Brit Hume quickly dispensed with that myth:
HUME: Well, first of all, the question of costs. Costs started leveling off around the time of the big economic downturn around 2008. They remain essentially flat, or grown only slightly since. So whether we can attribute any of these cost savings to ObamaCare I think is doubtful. And that does remain a big question.
In other words, the administration is attempting to take credit for something it had nothing to do with. Mr. Hume made one final point that's worth noting:
HUME: Only exchange experience we had yesterday, there was no platinum plan available. I was able to find one later on einsurance.com which seems to work fairly smoothly in distinction from the Obamacare Web site, but not on the exchanges. This thing is a mess.
In other words, HealthCare.gov is still a trainwreck. What's worse is that the private sector's websites had plans that weren't available on the federal government's exchanges. That means the exchanges aren't reflecting a full range of options for health insurance shoppers.
Here's a question for ACA supporters. Given the fact that HealthCare.gov is totally unreliable, especially compared with eBay and Amazon.com, why should we trust the federal government exchanges?
Posted Monday, December 2, 2013 6:35 AM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 03-Dec-13 08:19 AM
I still haven't heard mention of the fact that some 35 states' residents, even if they COULD get through to healthcare.gov, would be ineligible for subsidies. And on top of that, the portion of the software that would actually pay the insurance companies isn't written yet. In short, there will be millions of people without insurance at all, and many millions more who cannot afford the Obamacare alternative, and all that BEFORE tens of millions lose their employer coverage next year. How long until repeal?
Calling out Chancellor Rosenstone
It's time to call MnSCU Chancellor Steve Rosenstone out for not doing his job. Specifically, he's essentially told SCSU President Earl Potter that he won't be called out for anything he does. It's a sad commentary when news stations and investigative journalists pay more attention to SCSU than the man who's supposed to be the taxpayers' watchdog.
Whether Chancellor Rosenstone likes it or not, he's changed with spending the taxpayers' money wisely. He's also expected to prevent corruption. He's failed at both responsibilities.
-
It's worth noting that the Potter administration admitted that FYE enrollment at St. Cloud State is down another 5% for this year. That would put St. Cloud State's FYE enrollment at 12,400, a drop of 17.9% in FYE enrollment.
At minimum, Chancellor Rosenstone should've asked President Potter for a blueprint for turning enrollment around. Had Rosenstone done that, he would've sent President Potter the message that this is something Potter should take seriously, something President Potter didn't do initially.
We know that because a) the Faculty Association has asked his administration for an enrollment management plan and b) the administration admited they don't have an enrollment management plan during a Meet & Confer meeting.
That isn't the only calamity that Chancellor Rosenstone should've looked into. He has the responsibility of inquiring into President Potter's signing of the lease with the Wedum Foundation, which is costing St. Cloud State over $1,000,000 a year.
It's apparent that Rosenstone isn't questioning President Potter's financial decisions, which directly affects the financial health of St. Cloud State.
That's before talking about the grade transcript scandal, which Silence Dogood wrote about in this post :
The discovery by faculty of transcript adulterations, where a student's record of registration is removed from their academic transcript, was brought to the attention of the administration at a meeting on May 2, 2012 [Provost Malhotra, Registrar Sue Bayerl, Associate Provost John Palmer, Special Assistant to the Provost Phil Godding, FA President Mark Jaede, FA President-Elect Susan Hubbs, and Academic Affairs Committee Chair Jack McKenna were present].
The transcript adulterations were initially discovered because the chemistry department had recently instituted a policy where a student taking a class for the third time needs to have permission from the instructor to advance register for the course. During registration in the spring of 2012, two chemistry faculty were reviewing the enrollment for an upcoming fall organic chemistry course. They recognized a student who was enrolled that each of the faculty thought each had failed and they wondered how the student could have registered without prior faculty approval. A review of the student's transcript showed that the student's enrollment in organic chemistry in the Fall of 2011 was erased (none of the other classes the student had been taking that semester were removed).
Had Chancellor Rosenstone investigated beyond President Potter, he might've found the truth. Apparently, Chancellor Rosenstone didn't do that.
In summation, it's obvious that Chancellor Rosenstone isn't the taxpayers' watchdog. Based on Silence Dogood's writings, Chancellor Rosenstone isn't willing to investigate corruption, either.
If he isn't willing to tell university presidents that he's watching their financial decisions, he isn't taking his responsibilities seriously. That's unacceptable.
Posted Thursday, December 5, 2013 10:49 AM
Comment 1 by James Rugg at 05-Dec-13 09:02 PM
The list of questionable decisions by management at SCSU seems to be on a roll. We see a much needed Aviation program axed while eight times as much money is spent on social programs that contribute little to the countries growth. Millions are spent on buildings without occupancy. Now, this article questions the actions and responsibility of built in checks and balances. A full audit of the use of taxpayer dollars and a public discussion of the mission of education is in order.
Westrom announces congressional candidacy
This morning, Torrey Westrom announced that he's running to unseat Collin Peterson. Here's Westrom's statement accompanying his announcement:
TORREY WESTROM ANNOUNCES 7TH DISTRICT CONGRESSIONAL BID
Elbow Lake, MN - Today, State Senator Torrey Westrom will announce his plans to run for Congress in Minnesota's 7th district.
'As Minnesota families are crushed by burdensome regulations and overreaching government policies like ObamaCare, it's time Minnesotans had someone they could count on to be part of the solution in Washington, DC,' said Westrom. 'Washington politicians are out of step with the priorities of Minnesotans and I'm running for Congress because I understand how that disconnect is bankrupting our future.'
Torrey Westrom was first elected to the Minnesota House of Representatives in 1997. Westrom is a conservative with a record of creating rural jobs and ensuring that the government operates within its means. Westrom is a strong supporter of smaller government and supports the need for a balanced budget amendment.
After losing his sight at the age of 14 in a farm-related accident, Westrom is a strong advocate for people with disabilities and eliminating barriers to help them become more independent in their living and employment opportunities. As a child, Westrom's family dairy farmed in Wilmer, Minnesota, and later on the family farm in Elbow Lake. Now, Torrey and his wife, Anna, are small business owners, have three children and reside in Elbow Lake, Minnesota.
To learn more about Torrey Westrom, or to contribute, please visit: www.TorreyWestrom2014.com .
Each election cycle brings out the rumors that Rep. Peterson is thinking about retiring. Each time, those rumors turn out not to be true. This year, Torrey Westrom didn't wait for Peterson to retire. That's why he jumped in. Westrom represents a strong candidate who will get substantial financial backing from the NRCC in addition to his own fundraising abilities.
Though I don't have a read on whether Peterson is perceived to be vulnerable, there's no doubt that Sen. Westrom is a candidate they'll have to take seriously.
In 2008, Peterson won overwhelmingly. In 2010, Peterson's share of the vote dropped from 72.2% to 55.2%. Last year, Peterson won by 26 points. The bad news for him is that his percentage of the vote only rose 5 points. Without an Obama wave to ride, Peterson has shown he's vulnerable. In the past, he's faced underwhelming opponents. That won't be the case this year.
Whether this is the year that Peterson retires or the people fire him is still in doubt. What isn't in doubt is that he'll face an appealing, well-funded opponent. Also, there's no doubt that Democrats will be running into strong headwinds like the economy and the Affordable Care Act.
Posted Thursday, December 5, 2013 11:16 AM
No comments.
Rep. Davids to Gov. Dayton: Fix MnSure first
Thursday morning, Rep. Greg Davids sent a letter to Gov. Dayton about MnSure. Here's that letter:
In the letter, Rep. Davids highlighted the fact that the MnSure Board of Directors was given authority to vote on something called Active Purchaser. This paragraph hits at the heart of what's wrong with the MnSure Board of Directors:
The reality is that active purchaser gives seven unelected, unaccountable board members the powers to decide what constitutes a "meaningful choice" for hard working Minnesotans and small businesses.
Here's what's wrong with this model:
Shortly aftrer its botched launch, MnSure revealed its vision for active purchaser in response to questions about the lack of choices in southeastern Minnesota. A MnSure representative told an audience in Owatonna that the opportunity to deny carriers from selling on MnSure will result in more competition and reduced costs.
Rep. Davids highlights the foolishness of that type of thinking in the next sentence:
In southeastern Minnesota, reducing options to increase choice and competitiveness is a mathematical impossibility.
I'd modify that statement slightly. I'd argue that reducing options to increase choice and competitiveness is a mathematical impossibility anywhere in the United States, not just in southeastern Minnesota.
I'd oppose this type of board whether the governor was a Republican or Democrat, mostly because it usurps the power of the legislature. Also, that part of the statute is written with vague language and platitudes:
As you may know, the MnSure enacting legislation provided the Board with broad, ambiguous power to limit the number of plans offered on the exchange starting in 2015. This arbitrary authority is based on innocent-sounding, but subjective and easily manipulated terms, such as "quality and value" and "meaningful choices."
Those terms are subjective to give the board almost unlimited authority over the companies that provide these plans. In short, it's potentially a legally sanctioned extortion racket. Anyone that thinks that's tinfoil hat thinking is kidding themselves about the condition of the human race.
Anyone that's taken an honest look at Ted Kaczynski or Timothy McVeigh must admit that humans are capable of doing exceptionally wicked things.
Finally, Rep. Davids gave Gov. Dayton sound advice that Gov. Dayton will ignore:
It would be much wiser use of MnSure's time to focus on enhancements to the consumer experience, user security, and the still unaccomplished task of electronically transmitting to insurance companies the application and payment information of those attempting to enroll through MnSure.
In short, Rep. Davids is advising Gov. Dayton to fix what isn't working first.
I know that's radical thinking to Gov. Dayton but it works in the private sector every day.
Posted Friday, December 6, 2013 1:39 AM
No comments.
Using Pelosi's words against Democrats
When Bill Hemmer interviewed Frank Luntz about the Affordable Care Act, he played this Americans for Prosperity, aka AFP, ad to lead into the discussion:
The ad features Nancy Pelosi spewing the usual Democratic Party chanting points:
PELOSI: Democrats stand tall in support of the Affordable Care Act.
Then, against a black backdrop, comes this simple, effective message from AFP:
Tell Congress Obamacare isn't working. Stand tall for patients, not politics.
President Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have been exceptionally stubborn in their support of the ACA. Eventually, the people will rebel against them when they see how the ACA is limiting their choices without lowering their costs.
Hemmer asked Mr. Luntz a question that led to this exchange:
BILL HEMMER: The issue is trust. How does that play out in the ad, do you believe?
LUNTZ: That's exactly the point, Bill. You get it, that it isn't about the health care act that's important. It's about politicians refusing to take accountability when they make mistakes. Clearly, the rollout wasn't effective. Clearly, people were being thrown off their plans. And health care is just symbolic of a greater problem, that these Washington politicians like former Speaker Pelosi are making promises to the American people that they can't keep.
It isn't just that people think Democrats aren't trustworthy. It's that they're mad politicians don't even listen to them.
Lots of people appear on the Sunday talk shows or on FNC or CNN. They repeat their scripted message as often as it's warranted. That's a major mistake. Republicans, myself included, frequently disagreed with Bill Clinton. That said, they learned that listening is a virtue. Democrats seemed to have learned the opposite lesson. Michael Barone noticed that flaw in this column :
If Obamacare's architects were keen on preventing exit, they blithely ignored voice. The legislation was unpopular when it was proposed, while it was passed and in the months and years afterwards. Barack Obama seldom mentioned it in the 2012 campaign except for the provision allowing "children" under 26 to stay on mommy and daddy's policies.
That's another way of saying that Democrats shoved unpopular legislation down the American people's throats. Then they lied about what the bill wouldn't do.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that that's a recipe for disaster.
Posted Friday, December 6, 2013 9:51 AM
No comments.
SCSU dragging MnSCU universities down
Six Years of Enrollments at MnSCU Universities
SCSU Not Looking so Good!
by Silence Dogood
The following figure shows the Full Year Equivalent (FYE) enrollments for all of MnSCU universities from FY08 through FY13:
There are clear and obvious differences in the sizes of the institutions. However, what is perhaps more interesting are the trend lines for enrollment. Metro is looking good with five years of continuous growth. Winona's overall trend looks to be heading upward. Mankato was a bit down for FY13 but the overall trend is upward. Southwest looks at least to be holding steady. The other three universities, Bemidji, Moorhead and SCSU all had increasing enrollments but have reached a peak and have all experienced two years or in the case of SCSU a three-year decline in enrollment. It is also clear that the decline at SCSU is significantly larger than the declines experienced by Bemidji and Moorhead.
In a St. Cloud Times article that appeared first online on November 21, 2013, this statement is made: "Enrollment is down at all seven state universities except Minnesota State-Mankato, which has stable enrollment. That means universities in the system are going through similar budget issues." Unless you think the reporter made it up, this information was provided by the SCSU administration. It is also information that is clearly not true. The following plot shows the Fall'12 to Fall'13 enrollments from data taken from the MnSCU website.
The data shows clearly that not all seven universities are down because Metro's enrollment is actually up and Mankato and Bemidji are both down by the same amount (0.3%). Further, it should be easy to verify from this data that the statement "universities in the system are going through similar budget issues" is also clearly not true. The decline at SCSU is more than double the decline at any other university. In fact, the FYE decline is greater for SCSU than all of the other universities combined!
If the percent decline for Fall 2013 is used to project the FY14 enrollments, the following figure is obtained.
What is clearly obvious is that Metro continued it's mode of growth. Southwest, Bemidji, Winona and Mankato appear to be holding steady or only slightly declining. On the other hand, Moorhead seems to be headed in the wrong direction, being down from a peak enrollment of 6,812 in FY12 to 6,007 in FY14, which corresponds to a decline of 11.8%. It is now clear why the Moorhead administration has announced a 10% reduction in faculty. SCSU's peak in enrollment occurred one year earlier than Moorhead's toping out at 15,096 in FY10 but the decline has also been much more significant dropping to an enrollment of 12,335 in FY14, which translates into a loss of 2,761 FYE or a decline of 18.3%!
The other embarrassing fact revealed in the data is that Mankato is now ahead of SCSU by a total of 1,816 FYE amounting to a difference of 12.8%! So much for being the "second largest" university in Minnesota. The important question going forward is how can SCSU reverse the downward enrollment trend and at least stabilize enrollment? Clearly, being without a Vice President for Enrollment Management for over two years, being without a Director of Admissions for more than a year and being without an Enrollment Management Plan (EMP) for over two years, it is very difficult to believe that the downward trend will be reversed any time soon!
Perhaps a viable budget turnaround strategy might be to start investing in lottery tickets. Remember, somebody's got to win!
Originally posted Friday, December 6, 2013, revised 07-Dec 8:00 AM
Comment 1 by Jethro at 06-Dec-13 08:24 PM
Someone go find Yeager to defend SCSU with a one or two sentence opinion not supported by data.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 07-Dec-13 05:40 AM
No thanks.
Comment 3 by Yeager at 07-Dec-13 07:36 AM
Fine, here ya go - regional demographics have anything to do with this trend? Metro, Winona, Mankato are in better shape than the western universities.
I appreciate that Silence has seemingly embraced an analytical view of enrollment - its something that has been woefully lacking until very recently. Still waiting, however, for Silence to make a point beyond "the SCSU administration is doing something wrong!!" In fact, I'm not really even sure what Silence thinks that "something" is.
These postings continue to be a breakdown of analytics but to what end? What's the point? At the end Silence appears to suggest that this trend would be better if only SCSU would hire two or three more non-faculty positions...
Response 3.1 by Gary Gross at 07-Dec-13 08:13 AM
I won't speak for Silence. Instead, I'll just offer my opinion on what's wrong. On Sept. 20, 2011, President Potter fired Mahmoud Saffari. In the written explanation Dr. Saffari requested, Devinder Malhotra said that Dr. Saffari hadn't put an enrollment management plan. After Dr. Saffari's termination, however, the administration didn't put a high priority on putting an enrollment management plan together.
There still isn't such a plan in place, which either indicates a) an unacceptable level of attentiveness to solving difficult problems, b) a failure to properly prioritize and follow through on solving problems or c) an indifference towards solving important problems.
That's just my theory. Still, I'd love seeing the administration offer specific information showing what I got wrong.
Comment 4 by Nick at 07-Dec-13 09:15 AM
Yeager, maybe check out the facts as to why the aviation program was shut down without any hearings?: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jahbg9HH17A&noredirect=1
Comment 5 by Jethro at 07-Dec-13 10:47 AM
The video that Nick presented clearly shows President Potter lying. This is an integrity issue that underlies the whole leadership at SCSU. For Yeager, this seems like a non-issue because he doesn't mention it. With the exception of Gary, why the faculty haven't called Potter on the carpet to explain his constantly changing story regarding the aviation closure is a mystery. Do the faculty like being lied to by a university president? Is it the job of the Chancellor to provide cover for his sitting presidents? What are the trustees doing? How about the higher education committee chairs and members...have they not heard of oversight hearings? Is a $45 million dollar empty science building a non-issue? What do pro business republican politicians like Sen. Juliann Ortmann (and others) who sit on these higher education committees have to say?
Comment 6 by Patrick-M at 07-Dec-13 12:30 PM
Many universities with an aviation program are branching out into new technologies - those which might fit ISELF perfectly. This could help enrollment rebound.
Kent State http://www.ohio.com/news/drones-about-to-take-off-at-kent-state-1.450557 gets it. "...the university is intent on being at the forefront of the emerging technology..." The aviation industry supports 10 million jobs and $1 trillion in economic activity annually.
St. Cloud Times ignorance is showing
This Our View editorial in the St. Cloud Times was intended to sound moderate and reasonable. It isn't. This is a key sentence in the editorial:
The containment system PolyMet envisions has never been tried on this scale. And should it or other proposed mine systems fail, sulfide-laden waste materials could contaminate watersheds that feed both Lake Superior to the south and the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness to the north.
Anyone who's read a map knows this is part of the militant environmentalists' propaganda. PolyMet is on the south side of the continental divide. Waters on the south side of the divide flow south. The Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness, aka the BWCAW, is on the north side of the divide. It's physically impossible for PolyMet drainage to reach the BWCAW.
I don't blame the Times for not being experts on PolyMet issues. I blame them for not doing their homework to be credible. This paragraph doesn't help the Times' credibility either:
That debate, already simmering for years, hits new heights Friday when the state releases an 1,800-page environment impact statement about PolyMet Mining's proposal to create an open pit copper-nickel mine about 10 miles south of Ely.
That's BS. Here's what the PolyMet 'moonscape' looked like this year:
Conservation Minnesota, the Sierra Club and other environmentalist organizations talk about disturbing the Iron Range's delicate ecosystems. Does that picture look like a delicate ecosystem? Does it look like pristine wilderness? It definitely doesn't look pristine by most people's definition of pristine.
This paragraph is worth examining:
Dominating the rewards are likely 20 or 30 years of jobs and economic growth, mostly for the economically challenged Iron Range. Should PolyMet's efforts prove successful, a dozen or so other companies stand ready to seek mining permits, furthering that growth and undoubtedly creating trickle-down growth across the state.
If the permits are issued, PolyMet and Twin Metals will become major employers in Minnesota. That isn't speculation. That's verifiable fact.
As for "the economically challenged Iron Range", that's an understatement. According to this information from the U.S. census data, the median household income for St. Louis County, the heart of the Iron Range, for 2007-2011 is $45,399. That's a far cry from the statewide average of $58,476. That's only part of the picture. One in six people in St. Louis County, or 16.0%, lives in poverty.
I've written before that precious metal mining isn't the automatic ecological disaster that militant environmentalists insist it is. This post highlights the fact that it's quite possible to mine precious metals without destroying the environment:
In 1936, Kennecott constructed evaporation ponds to store and evaporate mine water originating from the Bingham Canyon watershed. Over time, additional ponds were constructed to increase capacity, and the area became known as the South Jordan Evaporation Ponds (SJEP). The ponds were used for mine water until 1965 and for periodic storage of runoff water until 1987. SJEP use was discontinued in 1987.
Studies in the early 1990s concluded that there were elevated levels of heavy metals in the soil where the holding ponds had been located. Kennecott took responsibility for the impacts and agreed to reclaim and remediate the SJEP area. The removal work was undertaken pursuant to an EPA Administrative Order on Consent (AOC).
A massive clean-up operation began in 1994 involving the removal of pond sediment and six additional inches of underlying native soil. The material removed from Daybreak was permanently relocated to the Kennecott Blue Water Repository as part of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) clean up. At this time, some sediment, with a low concentration of lead and arsenic but an elevated sulfate concentration were consolidated onsite and capped with topsoil and re-vegetated. In 2001, the EPA issued a Record of Decision stating that the removal action adequately satisfied the remedial objectives and EPA determined that no further action was required. An Operation and Maintenance Plan (O&M Plan) was established to address
further management of the consolidation site.
Pursuant to agreements between the EPA, UDEQ and Kennecott, Kennecott began removing the remaining sediments at the consolidation site under the guideline of the O&M Plan. In 2006, Kennecott, the EPA and the UDEQ entered into an agreement solidifying the unrestricted residential and commercial use clean-up standards for the entire site.
In early 2007, the consolidated pond sediment removal project was completed. In 2008, the EPA and UDEQ issued a Consent Decree for the ground water cleanup efforts.
It's time for people to ridicule dishonest environmentalist organizations. It's time to move forward with precious metals mining. It's time the private sector lifted the people of St. Louis County out of poverty by letting them flourish.
Originally posted Friday, December 6, 2013, revised 07-Dec 8:48 PM
Comment 1 by John Sherman at 09-Dec-13 10:53 AM
You should know that parts of the eastern section of the BWCA is in the Lake Superior watershed.
Comment 2 by Nancy McReady at 13-Dec-13 08:10 PM
Another point, PolyMet is not 10 south of Ely. It is near Aurora and Hoyt Lakes.
