January 30-31, 2014

Jan 30 03:01 SCSU 10-Day enrollment paints terrible picture
Jan 30 04:24 Fixing MNsure
Jan 30 15:13 Four little words

Jan 31 05:05 Sgt. Schultz...er, Gov. Dayton strikes again
Jan 31 10:31 The America Washington forgot
Jan 31 15:18 ABACA: Gutting vs. repealing

Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013



SCSU 10-Day enrollment paints terrible picture


Spring's 10th Day Enrollments More Bad News

by Silence Dogood


An early indicator of the final enrollment for a term is the 10th day enrollment. By the 10th day of a semester, most students will have settled on which classes they're taking and made arrangement to pay tuition. There are some additional part-term classes or graduate classes that are not captured by the 10th day number. However, these numbers are typically small when compared to the 10th day number.

Since all of the universities in MnSCU began spring semester classes on January 13th, the tenth day was reached on Monday January 27th. As a result, the enrollment on Tuesday, January 28th would reflect the enrollment as of the "10th day". As of January 29th at 4:30 am (the 11th day), the MnSCU website shows the enrollment numbers in the following table:



If you look at the data, Southwest stands out as an outlier. The reason for Southwest looking so bad is that it has an extremely large post-secondary program that registers later in the semester. From the FY13 data, at Southwest as much as 34.5% of the FYE enrollment comes from post-secondary students and much of this registration historically happens after the 10th day. Using data from prior years, including a comparison of the fall semester enrollment for this academic year, Southwest's enrollment will probably be down less than 100 FYE for this spring. As a result, Southwest's final enrollment number will not look as bad as there 10th day number might indicate.

SCSU becomes the outlier when controlling for Southwest's special case! The decline in spring semester FYE at SCSU (447) is larger than the drop in FYE for the other five universities combined (329). If an estimated drop in FYE enrollment for Southwest (100) is added, the drop in FYE at SCSU is still larger than all of the universities in the entire MnSCU system!

For S'14, the FYE enrollment change compared to S'13 is shown in the following figure (omitting Southwest):



Clearly, SCSU has some enrollment yet to be added due to post-secondary students, part-term and graduate classes so the spring semester enrollment decline will likely be less than 8.0%. However, it is not likely to be much smaller. Analysis of the data shows that SCSU has significantly increased its headcount enrollment of post-secondary students over the past several years. In the fall semester, 19.7% of the head count enrollment came from post-secondary students. Unfortunately, since post-secondary students only take an average of 5.1 credits, it takes almost 6 post-secondary students to equal 1 FYE. As a result, the third-trimester post-secondary classes will not move the enrollment significantly. Additionally, there aren't enough part-term or graduate courses to affect the final enrollment number either.

As a result, the final enrollment decline for FY14, which currently is listed as 6.0% will probably be closer to 6% than the 5% decline predicted by President Potter last September. However, what is important to understand is that even if President Potter was exactly correct and the enrollment was down only 5%, the decline at SCSU would still be double the next largest annual decline at any MnSCU university! Aside from SCSU, the largest annual enrollment decline is at Minnesota State University - Moorhead, which is currently down 2.3% for the year and, as a result, is reducing their faculty and staff by 10%. President Potter shouldn't feel too good if the enrollment decline were to meet his prediction. A 5% decline is a significant decline! Coupled with the declines from the past three years, the enrollment decline at SCSU is staggering! The annual declines in enrollment from FY11 are shown in the following figure:



Two items can be gleaned from this data. First, it appears that the trend in enrollment decline the past couple of years is heading in the right direction! Unfortunately, if this trend is linear, SCSU's enrollment is projected to stop declining in FY26, which means at the current rate of reduced decline it will take 12 years to stop year-to-year declines! Second, if the post-secondary enrollment students are taken into account, the rate of the decline in enrollment is no longer declining! Another way to put it is that without the spectacular expansion of the post-secondary enrollments, the enrollment trend points to less students on campus.



The expansion of the post-secondary enrollments at SCSU is also something that has occurred without much, if any, discussion. No one has discussed how 20% of the headcount enrollment being high school students affects the university and surrounding community. It is true that, any port in a storm is better than no port. However, when the storm clears and you look around, some ports are much less desirable than others!

Without a shared vision for the university's future, it is hard to imagine that SCSU is headed to the most desirable port. But it's actually worse when there is no VISION and storm clouds or the actual raging storm is ignored. If an institution lacks vision, it simply stumbles around in the dark and where it ends up is left to chance! Despite the fact that a blind squirrel occasionally finds an acorn, is would be better if SCSU leaders opened their eyes and admitted the institution needs to work on a shared vision leading to a course that leads to a desired port. If SCSU's leaders do not open their eyes, the institution's chances of arriving at the desired port will be no better than that blind squirrel finding an acorn.


Posted Thursday, January 30, 2014 3:01 AM

Comment 1 by Crimson Trace at 30-Jan-14 11:28 PM
20% of the headcount enrollments at SCSU are high school students taking college classes? In terms of overall headcount, that is troubling. I cannot image a high school student taking a college course or two generates much revenue. Of course, doctoring student transcripts takes the cake!

http://www.examiner.com/article/exclusive-scsu-transcript-scandal-exposed?CID=examiner_alerts_article

http://www.letfreedomringblog.com/?p=15955


Fixing MNsure


I wrote here that the St. Cloud Times had published my LTE about MNsure's failings. Predictably, one of the lefty trolls that inhabit the Times' message board tried taking me to task for what I'd written:




"We can definitely do better than that."



How's that for a typical Conservative/Tbagger response? Not a suggestion on how to do it differently - just that it should be done differently. How easy is it to whine and complain? I hope he didn't strain himself with the thought that went into this.



What a surprise. I thought someone might give a suggestion about what could be done to make it better, but NO! They don't know how to make it better they just know they deserve more and better. Yeah, sure.


I decided not to respond to this troll's comments because I didn't want to deal with her in that setting. That being said, there's something worth learning from this troll's snide comments.



Implicit in this troll's comments is that I have an affirmative responsibility to fix the DFL-created mess. Conservatives should ignore that argument. If they aren't legislators, they don't have a responsibility for fixing the DFL's messes. It's more than that, though.

While it's true that it likely was impossible to make MNsure work, it's also true that Gov. Dayton's total indifference to MNsure is something that activists and legislators can't fix this session. We can fix it through next November's election but that's a different story.

In the LTE, I highlighted the fact that the DFL co-chairs of the MNsure Legislative Oversight Committee didn't hold oversight hearings for almost 4 months. I noted that this was while MNsure was going through a series of crises and while April Todd-Malmlov was taking a 2-week Costa Rican vacation with her lover.

Again, what legislation will fix partisan apathy towards a crisis? Rep. Atkins and Sen. Lourey alone have the authority to call hearings of that oversight committee. The ranking member can call for hearings but that legislator doesn't have the authority to gavel in an oversight committee hearing.

Again, the remedy is defeating a bunch of DFL legislators next November so that a Republican legislator is picked by the incoming speaker to co-chair the committee.

As for the rest of this troll's snotty remarks, I won't respond substantively to them because they aren't substantive comments. I'd recommend that approach whenever a DFL activist tries getting into a pissing match. That's what ABM, TakeAction Minnesota, AFSCME and other DFL special interest groups specialize in.

That's their specialty because they're incapable of making substantive arguments. The reality is that ABM's entire arsenal consists of smearing people and making non sequitur arguments.

When it comes to social media, the best response is to not directly respond to the trolls. Instead, it's better to start your own, substantive argument on MNsure. Highlight the fact that there aren't any legislative fixes for gubernatorial incompetence. Highlight the fact that there isn't a legislative fix when the co-chairs of an oversight committee aren't interested in finding out why the exchange is careening from crisis to crisis without a project manager in place.

It's time to make the DFL explain why they weren't interested in correcting MNsure's overabundance of major mistakes. They created it. They broke it. They ignored it. It's their responsibility to fix it.

Unfortunately, Minnesota families are hurting thanks to the DFL's initiatives.

Posted Thursday, January 30, 2014 4:24 AM

Comment 1 by Patrick-M at 30-Jan-14 07:00 AM
So you totally screw up and you get rewarded! awesome. NOT

14 MNsure managers got bonuses for work on balky website

by JACKIE CROSBY, Star Tribune, Jan. 30, 2014

http://www.startribune.com/business/242685671.html



Subheading: More than $26,000 was awarded before problems were exposed.. I guess they wanted to make sure the redistribution of taxpayer money was completed before everyone caught on.

Comment 2 by Rex Newman at 30-Jan-14 09:20 AM
Since when do you get bonuses before a project is even done? Note to GOP: introduce a bill to prohibit bonuses to state employees. In today's job market, there is no need for such carrots.

Comment 3 by walter hanson at 30-Jan-14 10:00 AM
Gary:

I think I would've wrote back:

"Do you think MN Sure is working properly? If no don't you think the first thing that should be done is have oversight hearings where the board answers every question the Republicans have so they can help come up with ideas?

You do realize that not a single person who is appointed by Republicans is in charge of MN Sure."

Walter Hanson

Minneapolis, MN


Four little words


George Will is right. It's possible that 4 little words might doom the Anything But Affordable Care Act:




The four words that threaten disaster for the ACA say the subsidies shall be available to persons who purchase health insurance in an exchange 'established by the state.' But 34 states have chosen not to establish exchanges.


From a plain language standpoint, this isn't difficult to predict. If this lawsuit makes it to the Supreme Court and if the justices rule that the plain text of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which I'll call the Anything But Affordable Care Act from this point forward, means what it says, then I'd expect a 9-0 ruling that the IRS doesn't have the authority to change the plain text of the ABACA:






So the IRS, which is charged with enforcing the ACA, has ridden to the rescue of Barack Obama's pride and joy. Taking time off from writing regulations to restrict the political speech of Obama's critics, the IRS has said, with its breezy indifference to legality, that subsidies shall also be dispensed to those who purchase insurance through federal exchanges the government has established in those 34 states. Pruitt is challenging the IRS in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma, and there are similar challenges in Indiana, Virginia and Washington, D.C.


The history of the bill matters:






Congress made subsidies available only through state exchanges as a means of coercing states into setting up exchanges. In Senate Finance Committee deliberations on the ACA, Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), one of the bill's primary authors, suggested conditioning tax credits on state compliance because only by doing so could the federal government induce state cooperation with the ACA. Then the law's insurance requirements could be imposed on states without running afoul of constitutional law precedents that prevent the federal government from commandeering state governments.


In other words, Sen. Baucus understood that the Supreme Court would likely rule the ABACA unconstitutional if the legislation required states to create health insurance exchanges. Without that coercion, only states with out-of-touch far left governors (like Minnesota, New York and Vermont) would've created state-run HIXs.



As big a deal as these things are, there's an even bigger principle at stake here:




If courts allow the IRS's demarche, they will validate this:



By dispensing subsidies through federal exchanges, the IRS will spend tax revenues without congressional authorization. And by enforcing the employer mandate in states that have only federal exchanges, it will collect taxes; remember, Chief Justice John Roberts saved the ACA by declaring that the penalty enforcing the mandate is really just a tax on the act of not purchasing insurance, without congressional authorization.

If the IRS can do neither, it cannot impose penalties on employers who fail to offer ACA-approved insurance to employees. If the IRS can do both, Congress can disband because it has become peripheral to American governance.


If the Supreme Court gets this one wrong, then it's over. There are tons of constitutional principles at stake here. That's before taking the plain language of the bill into consideration.



Let's be clear, though. I don't mean to sound pessimistic. I'm not. This is exceptionally straightforward. While it's important from a constitutional standpoint, it also revolves around whether the justices will pretend that the plain text of the bill doesn't mean what it means.

The original lawsuit was almost entirely about constitutional principles. This lawsuit is primarily, though not entirely, about the plain text of the ABACA. It's difficult to think that Chief Justice Roberts will rule that the bill's text doesn't mean what it says.

Posted Thursday, January 30, 2014 3:13 PM

No comments.


Sgt. Schultz...er, Gov. Dayton strikes again


If people don't take their blood pressure medication before reading this article , it isn't because I didn't warn them.

ALERT: Don't read this article if you have high blood pressure.

Here's what I'm talking about:




Fourteen MNsure managers were paid bonuses totalling more than $26,000 in November as Minnesota launched its troubled online health insurance exchange, state officials said Wednesday.


If you think that's why I'm upset, you're partially right. This part has me furious:






Matt Swenson, a spokesman for the governor, said Dayton's office was not involved in or aware of the bonuses . Swenson said that by law, MNsure operates independently of the governor and has its own board and executive director.


In other words, Gov. Dayton is insisting that he didn't have a clue what was happening in his executive branch. It's getting tiresome. First, Gov. Dayton played the Sgt. Schultz Card when he 'found out' that PSLs, aka money-making devices for the Wilfs, were in the stadium deal he personally negotiated.

The next time he played the Sgt. Schultz Card was right before FarmFest, when he expressed surprise that Minnesota's sales tax was in the Tax Bill that he negotiated.

The third time Gov. Dayton played the Sgt. Schultz Card, it was when he expressed surprise when he found out that the contracts with the MNsure contractors had been changed.

This time, he's surprised because people who'd failed with their mission received bonuses.

What's striking is that Gov. Dayton's Sgt. Schultz moments are coming more rapidly. It took almost 2 years before his first incident. It took only 6 months (roughly) for his second bout with Sgt. Schultz Syndrome. It was just 4 months from the FarmFest bout with Sgt. Schultz Syndrome until he played the Sgt. Schultz Card on the MNsure contracts. It took less than a month for him to be utterly clueless about the bonuses.

The first question I have is whether Gov. Dayton has a clue as to what's happening in his administration. It certainly doesn't appear that he does. The next question is, if he doesn't know what's happening, who's running the government? I certainly didn't vote for Bob Hume or Tina Smith to run the state government.

Posted Friday, January 31, 2014 5:05 AM

Comment 1 by walter hanson at 31-Jan-14 07:15 PM
Gary:

Um didn't governor Dayton in June 2011 not know what he had offered the Republicans to end the budget crisis. Doesn't that qualify as a Sargent Schultz moment in his first two years?

Walter Hanson

Minneapolis, MN

Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 31-Jan-14 09:53 PM
Good catch, Walter. I thought of that this morning. That definitely qualifies as a Sgt. Schultz moment.


The America Washington forgot


This Peggy Noonan article dovetails nicely with Glenn Reynolds' excellent column about "Irish Democracy", which I wrote about in this post . First, here's Dr. Reynolds' explanation of the foundation of Irish Democracy:




In his excellent book, Two Cheers For Anarchism, Professor James Scott writes:



One need not have an actual conspiracy to achieve the practical effects of a conspiracy. More regimes have been brought, piecemeal, to their knees by what was once called 'Irish Democracy,' the silent, dogged resistance, withdrawal, and truculence of millions of ordinary people, than by revolutionary vanguards or rioting mobs.


Simply put, people refusing to buy insurance through the Anything But Affordable Care Act's exchanges are putting the ABACA in impossible financial straights. This was made necessary when Senate Democrats and this administration wouldn't listen to the American people. In Ms. Noonan's opinion, they still aren't listening:






As the president made his jaunty claims and the senators and congressmen responded semirapturously I kept thinking of four words: Meanwhile, back in America...



Meanwhile, back in America, the Little Sisters of the Poor were preparing their legal briefs. The Roman Catholic order of nuns first came to America in 1868 and were welcomed in every city they entered. They now run about 30 homes for the needy across the country. They have, quite cruelly, been told they must comply with the ObamaCare mandate that all insurance coverage include contraceptives, sterilization procedures, morning-after pills. If they don't - and of course they can't, being Catholic, and nuns - they will face ruinous fines.


In this instance, it isn't just that the Obama administration isn't listening to the American people. It's that they're ignoring the Constitution, too. That's before considering the fact that this administration made exceptions to the ABACA for its well-connected friends.



The message sent to the nation is exceptionally straightforward: Well-connected friends of Barack Obama get special privileges. People whom this President despises get the shaft. (That's right. I didn't forget about the bitter clingers.) President Obama's disdain for blue collar people isn't news. It's just disgusting. That's why people have turned their back on him.

Meanwhile, back in America...




Meanwhile, back in America, conservatives targeted and harassed by the Internal Revenue Service still await answers on their years-long requests for tax exempt status. When news of the IRS targeting broke last spring, agency officials lied about it, and one took the Fifth. The president said he was outraged, had no idea, read about it in the papers, boy was he going to get to the bottom of it. An investigation was announced but somehow never quite materialized.


If ever there was something that got the masses fuming, it should be the thought of a politically ruthless administration using the IRS as a weapon to eliminate its political enemies. And yes, this administration has used the IRS as a weapon against TEA Party activists and other conservative organizations.



In less than 3 years, we'll have the opportunity to wipe the memories of this administration from our memory. It's imperative that we accomplish that. It's imperative that we elect someone that will listen to the American people. That means electing a pro-reform governor that respects the Constitution, preferably Scott Walker, Bobby Jindal, John Kasich or Mike Pence.

I didn't include Jeb Bush or Christie in that bunch. They don't respect the Constitution. People want politicians that don't think of themselves as being above the Constitution or the rule of law. Bush supports Common Core, which wants to strip away local control of education. That's certainly anti-constitutional. Christie supports gun control, something totally at odds with the Constitution.

It's time we elected a president that's run things and accomplished things that've helped families. Bobby Jindal fits that description. While campaigning, he listened to parents who hated the education options their children had. That's why he pushed for school choice. Thanks to his listening, school choice legislation was signed into law in Louisiana.

John Kasich fits that description. He fought for the same union reforms that Scott Walker did. He also cut taxes while eliminating Ohio's deficit. Thanks to Gov. Kasich's popular pro-growth agenda, Ohio is headed in the right direction.

Scott Walker listened to Wisconsinites' cries for lower property taxes. He pushed union reforms that stripped them of the right to hold school districts hostage by saying that they had to buy health insurance through the teachers union's insurance company. As a direct result, health insurance costs to school districts dropped dramatically...until the ABACA was semi-implemented.

Whether you call it the TEA Party movement, Irish Democracy or whether it's just doing what President Reagan believed in, it's time for conservatives to elect someone that actually wants the people to decide what's best for them. We don't need another administration that thinks it's supremely qualified to tell families what's best for them.

Posted Friday, January 31, 2014 10:31 AM

No comments.


ABACA: Gutting vs. repealing


This Times Our View editorial offers an interesting option:




The biggest factor in reaching those goals is to get young people without insurance to enroll. That's not happening. Plus, implementation of the ACA caused countless people with insurance to either lose their policies, pay substantially more for them, or pay more for different coverage.



Lawmakers need to fix those problems. If polling is any indicator, that could happen by revising the ACA to do something such as allowing insurers to provide policies that are less expensive but come with higher deductibles.


First, I'll stipulate that offering catastrophic plans would destroy the Anything But Affordable Care Act because it would irreparably harm the insurance companies. Next, I'll stipulate that selling catastrophic plans would require eliminating the essential health benefits provisions of the bill.



President Obama, Sen. Reid and Nancy Pelosi would rather wear snow shoes while walking through a mine field than repealing the ABACA's essential health benefits provisions.

This part of the Times' editorial is upsetting:




The exposure of MNsure's endless problems the past three months speaks to the importance of government officials and private vendors being accountable.



As Minnesotans have seen, both sides are blaming each other for a laundry list of technical problems with the site. A consultant last week even recommended scrapping it.


While I agree that accountability is essential, that isn't as important as old-fashioned competence. It's indisputable that Gov. Dayton, the MNsure board of directors and the DFL co-chairs of the MNsure Legislative Oversight Committee didn't pay attention. Similarly, while it's true that the DFL smear machine have blamed Republicans for MNsure's failures, that doesn't mean the DFL's claims have merit. That's like blaming Republicans for raising income taxes last year. That's like blaming Republicans for creating the warehousing services sales tax and the farm equipment repair sales tax.



Those accusations are outright lies, which is what ABM specializes in.

Further, it'd be nice if the Times grew a spine. While it's true the DFL is blaming Republicans for MNsure's failures, it isn't too much to ask the Times' editorial board to say that the DFL's accusations are without merit.

While it might be possible to eliminate the counterproductive provisions from the ABACA, it's better to repeal it and replace it with a system that puts families, not distant, out-of-touch bureaucrats, in charge of their health insurance and health care. It's better to let families and their physicians determine which coverages they need. Finally, it's best if families determined which policies best fit their families' health care needs and their budget.

That's something Washington, DC can't do.



Originally posted Friday, January 31, 2014, revised 01-Feb 5:41 PM

Comment 1 by Rex Newman at 31-Jan-14 07:50 PM
I'm not sure what the language should be, but if the GOP offers a bill, it should simply allow us to buy health insurance (or none at all) on our own, without having to report or register it, and without consequence of any prior laws e.g. the ACA. Bonus points for: across state lines. But what do you bet Boehner and McCain, maybe even McConnell put together a "deal" to "fix" the ACA.

Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 31-Jan-14 09:52 PM
Rex, I'm betting that McCain won't utter a peep on this because the GOP doctors (Sens. Coburn & Barrasso, Rep. Price, Gingrey, Fleming, Scalise, etc.) have taken over putting the GOP alternative. That's actually something that Boehner should get credit for.

Popular posts from this blog

March 21-24, 2016

January 19-20, 2012

October 31, 2007