Texas higher education politics is in an uproar, and Colorado education reformers are in the middle of the action.
Texas Governor Rick Perry, who is pondering a presidential run, has launched an effort to reduce tuition costs and to increase productivity of the state’s two main research universities – the University of Texas (with 9 academic campuses) and Texas A&M (11 campuses).
Major players in the effort have Colorado ties. Rick O’Donnell, now a Texas think tank consultant who formerly headed Colorado’s Department of Higher Education and was policy chief under Governor Bill Owens (also defeated Republican congressional candidate); Alex Cranberg, an oil magnate and a K-12 educational reformer (pro vouchers) in Colorado; and Phil Burgess, one time head of the Center for the New West, a now defunct policy group, which was sponsored by US West.
O’Donnell has been the point person for Perry, who is using the Texas think tank to help produce analyses and recommendations to shake up the universities. The multi-year effort has caused a massive counterattack from university interest groups fighting to protect their autonomy and traditional methods of operation and compensations. One casualty was O’Donnell, who in late May was hired at the encouragement of UT Regents in a highly visible position to gather and analyze system-wide data on teaching, research and compensation. He was fired unceremoniously in a few weeks by the UT administration.
Phil Burgess came to the defense of O’Donnell in a Memorial weekend guest editorial in the Austin Standard portraying his old friend as an effective innovator in Colorado.
Perry is also adding like-minded people to the governing boards of the Texas state universities. Cranberg is one of his new picks for the UT Board of Regents.
While the effort has been derailed for the moment, there have been a number of initiatives at both A&M and UT. The state’s higher education establishment, its supporters, and both independent and critical stakeholders are now highly engaged in the discussion.
Although Colorado’s higher education system suffers from many of the same problems as those in Texas, and our major research universities are led by people with business backgrounds, reform here has been more modest and low key. Recent legislation (SB 52) calls for statewide goals and a master planning process. A similar planning effort was started at the beginning of the Ritter administration.
See articles:
Houston Chronicle
Perry’s pal pressing his “seven solutions”
Austin American-Statesman
Sneak attack on university research
San Antonio Express-News
University reformers advancing with “Seven”
Austin American-Statesman
UT System official ousted after criticizing bosses
Perry getting pushback from Longhorn faithful
UT System releases data on faculty salaries, teaching load
The American Independent
Statesman interviews Sandefer about higher ed proposals
Texas A&M Chancellor McKinney stepping down in July
Austin American-Statesman
UT Chancellor wins endorsement of regents
Dallas News
Perry and regents need to step back. Now.
Austin American-Statesman
Burgess: By being shortsighted, Texas will come out the loser
Times of Texas
Seven breakthrough solutions would boost productivity and accountability at public universities
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Denver Metro Area Retail Economy Continues to Improve
Although the recent economic news is full of gloom with a dropping stock market, a double dip in home prices, sky high fuel prices and trouble abroad, sales tax revenue in the Denver metro area continues to show strength over a year ago. In April, a one-cent sales tax would produce about $34 million in the Denver metro area; that is, a 6 percent increase over April 2010.
Sales tax revenue in 2010 was 7 percent higher than 2009 in the metro area. Year-to-date, the 2011 revenue is 8.8 percent over 2010.
See Associated Press article: State’s growth among slowest
Sales tax revenue in 2010 was 7 percent higher than 2009 in the metro area. Year-to-date, the 2011 revenue is 8.8 percent over 2010.
See Associated Press article: State’s growth among slowest
Monday, June 6, 2011
Country Leans Right; Colorado on More Liberal Side
A regular political variable pollsters capture is ideology. A scale from liberal to conservative, sometimes with gradations, such as lean liberal or lean conservative, and always including a center position labeled moderate or middle-of-the-road, has been asked of Americans since polling began in earnest after the Second World War.
There has been considerable debate about the concept. Some scholars and practitioners have argued people do not have much understanding of the concept, and there is variation depending on the domain people are using, such as social values, economic positions or foreign policy (people may be liberal on some and conservative on others). Also, liberal intellectuals believe their label has been denigrated, and people who are liberal are selecting the labels “moderate” or “middle-of-the-road” to avoid using it. They prefer the label “progressive.”
But, the concept is well-grounded in social science. It has been around for a long time and has considerable stability. When ideology is matched with partisanship of a population there is very high levels (albeit, far from perfect) of correlation between Democrats and liberalism and Republicans and conservatism.
Gallup recently published an analysis of its 2010 surveys with more than 180,000 American adults and the latest results of the nation’s ideology.
Colorado is on the more liberal side of the 50-state spectrum (plus D.C.), registering 36th most conservative state and the 8th most liberal.
In general, the country labels itself about twice as conservative as liberal (40% to 20%). The West contains a share of some of the most conservative states: Idaho (2nd), Wyoming (4th) and Utah (5th).
Mid-point western states, which are still two-to-one conservative, are New Mexico (23rd), Alaska (24th) and Montana (26th).
Still leaning conservative, but on the more liberal end of the spectrum are Arizona (28th), Nevada (30th) and Colorado (36th). These states are considered battleground states for the 2012 presidential race, and Arizona and Nevada have competitive senate elections (both without incumbents).
At the liberal end of the scale with less than a 10-percentage-point difference between people who label themselves liberal and conservative are Oregon (40th), California (42nd) and Washington (43rd). Hawaii (50th), the most western state with nearly as many liberals as conservatives, is only beat out as the most liberal state by Washington D.C. (51st).
Liberal and Democratic candidates often win states in the west, including the inner west, because personalities, issue positions and campaigns make a difference, but importantly large numbers of middle-of-the-road or moderate voters, which represent about 35 percent of the western electorate, lean liberal in many western states or are volatile and can be persuaded to move left.
There has been considerable debate about the concept. Some scholars and practitioners have argued people do not have much understanding of the concept, and there is variation depending on the domain people are using, such as social values, economic positions or foreign policy (people may be liberal on some and conservative on others). Also, liberal intellectuals believe their label has been denigrated, and people who are liberal are selecting the labels “moderate” or “middle-of-the-road” to avoid using it. They prefer the label “progressive.”
But, the concept is well-grounded in social science. It has been around for a long time and has considerable stability. When ideology is matched with partisanship of a population there is very high levels (albeit, far from perfect) of correlation between Democrats and liberalism and Republicans and conservatism.
Gallup recently published an analysis of its 2010 surveys with more than 180,000 American adults and the latest results of the nation’s ideology.
Colorado is on the more liberal side of the 50-state spectrum (plus D.C.), registering 36th most conservative state and the 8th most liberal.
In general, the country labels itself about twice as conservative as liberal (40% to 20%). The West contains a share of some of the most conservative states: Idaho (2nd), Wyoming (4th) and Utah (5th).
Mid-point western states, which are still two-to-one conservative, are New Mexico (23rd), Alaska (24th) and Montana (26th).
Still leaning conservative, but on the more liberal end of the spectrum are Arizona (28th), Nevada (30th) and Colorado (36th). These states are considered battleground states for the 2012 presidential race, and Arizona and Nevada have competitive senate elections (both without incumbents).
At the liberal end of the scale with less than a 10-percentage-point difference between people who label themselves liberal and conservative are Oregon (40th), California (42nd) and Washington (43rd). Hawaii (50th), the most western state with nearly as many liberals as conservatives, is only beat out as the most liberal state by Washington D.C. (51st).
Liberal and Democratic candidates often win states in the west, including the inner west, because personalities, issue positions and campaigns make a difference, but importantly large numbers of middle-of-the-road or moderate voters, which represent about 35 percent of the western electorate, lean liberal in many western states or are volatile and can be persuaded to move left.
Friday, June 3, 2011
Obama Moves American Policy on the Middle East
President Barack Obama is betting that the Arab Spring and its populist movement is the future, and that it is in America’s interest to align with it. He is shifting American policy in the Middle East, including negotiations between Palestinians and Israelis. In using the 1967 borders as a starting point, he clearly signaled to all the participants America was adjusting positions.
America’s support of change over stability sends a message to Israel that its current position is not sustainable. In this new era, it must adopt a more sophisticated strategy that includes a new negotiating position if peace is ever to be realized – or even support retained among Western nations.
The administration calculated that even in a re-election year, a shift was the smart position. Obama’s strategy now aligns with the position of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party, which would advocate for a more balanced, and hence, a more pro-Palestinian policy than has been the historic American position.
Americans have favored Israelis over Palestinians by 60 percent to 20 percent for decades. Opinion breaks closer to 50-50 when testing actions in which Israel has asserted itself, such as in Gaza and Lebanon. Israeli aggression evokes sympathy for Palestinians as underdogs and concern for human rights related to living conditions and occupation. Liberal Democrats lean in favor of Palestinian rights because of “fairness.”
• Democrats and Republicans have long held significant differences in their support of Palestine and Israel, although a majority of both support Israel’s position.
• The far left wing of the Democratic Party – for example, campus activists – considers itself pro-Palestinian and anti-Zionist.
• Worldwide public opinion has long remained against Israel. Only American vetoes or veto threats protect Israeli interests in the U.N.
• The administration believes Israel’s inflexible position has become unsustainable in the current Middle East upheaval. Old allies have fallen and new forces will be more aggressive for the Palestinian position. Palestinians recognize the opportunities in the new environment and have unified. They are exercising renewed political and street action.
The domestic potency regarding the defense of Israel’s interests has depended on major concentrations of pro-Israeli Jews in major cities, such as New York and Los Angeles, and in media, financial and political strongholds of power. But, Jewish leaders themselves tend to be liberal Democrats and are constrained by party and ideology from having a pure pro-Israeli position.
Ignoring the administration’s claim that this was not a new position, the backlash from the Washington D.C. pro-Israel interests was immediate and potent. In Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel has an aggressive and articulate spokesperson. But, he’s playing a defensive position with a weak hand. A significant portion of Israel’s defense needs are met through American armaments. Obama’s realignment will be praised by many foreign policy realists, neo-cons and, of course, the Democrats’ foreign policy liberals. Although Republicans will try to attract some of the Democrats’ usual widespread Jewish support (upward of 75% of American Jews are Democratic), Democrats remain optimistic they will continue to hold most American Jewish support.
America’s support of change over stability sends a message to Israel that its current position is not sustainable. In this new era, it must adopt a more sophisticated strategy that includes a new negotiating position if peace is ever to be realized – or even support retained among Western nations.
The administration calculated that even in a re-election year, a shift was the smart position. Obama’s strategy now aligns with the position of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party, which would advocate for a more balanced, and hence, a more pro-Palestinian policy than has been the historic American position.
Americans have favored Israelis over Palestinians by 60 percent to 20 percent for decades. Opinion breaks closer to 50-50 when testing actions in which Israel has asserted itself, such as in Gaza and Lebanon. Israeli aggression evokes sympathy for Palestinians as underdogs and concern for human rights related to living conditions and occupation. Liberal Democrats lean in favor of Palestinian rights because of “fairness.”
• Democrats and Republicans have long held significant differences in their support of Palestine and Israel, although a majority of both support Israel’s position.
• The far left wing of the Democratic Party – for example, campus activists – considers itself pro-Palestinian and anti-Zionist.
• Worldwide public opinion has long remained against Israel. Only American vetoes or veto threats protect Israeli interests in the U.N.
• The administration believes Israel’s inflexible position has become unsustainable in the current Middle East upheaval. Old allies have fallen and new forces will be more aggressive for the Palestinian position. Palestinians recognize the opportunities in the new environment and have unified. They are exercising renewed political and street action.
The domestic potency regarding the defense of Israel’s interests has depended on major concentrations of pro-Israeli Jews in major cities, such as New York and Los Angeles, and in media, financial and political strongholds of power. But, Jewish leaders themselves tend to be liberal Democrats and are constrained by party and ideology from having a pure pro-Israeli position.
Ignoring the administration’s claim that this was not a new position, the backlash from the Washington D.C. pro-Israel interests was immediate and potent. In Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel has an aggressive and articulate spokesperson. But, he’s playing a defensive position with a weak hand. A significant portion of Israel’s defense needs are met through American armaments. Obama’s realignment will be praised by many foreign policy realists, neo-cons and, of course, the Democrats’ foreign policy liberals. Although Republicans will try to attract some of the Democrats’ usual widespread Jewish support (upward of 75% of American Jews are Democratic), Democrats remain optimistic they will continue to hold most American Jewish support.
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Hispanic Voters Key Swing Group
Hispanic voters in Denver’s mayoral election could be the key swing vote. They represent between 11 (Ciruli Associates) and 17 percent (Denver Post robo poll) of the Denver electorate according to recent polls.
The national exit poll in the 2010 November election indicated they were 8 percent of the national electorate and 12 percent of Colorado November voters.
In the Denver poll of two weeks ago (RBI Strategies), Hispanics were closely divided between Chris Romer (43%) and Michael Hancock (37%). The latest Denver Post robo poll shows Latinos favoring Hancock 45 percent to 41 percent for Romer, reversing earlier results.
Among James Mejia voters in the first round of voting, their preference favored Hancock 43 percent to 39 percent for Romer (RBI Strategies).
Romer has made a major effort to win Hispanic voters using the Mejia endorsement and specific issue appeals. If he is losing or barely winning them, then he probably can’t win the election. They are a key swing group.
See Pew Research Center report: The Latino Electorate in 2010: More Voters, More Non-Voters
The national exit poll in the 2010 November election indicated they were 8 percent of the national electorate and 12 percent of Colorado November voters.
In the Denver poll of two weeks ago (RBI Strategies), Hispanics were closely divided between Chris Romer (43%) and Michael Hancock (37%). The latest Denver Post robo poll shows Latinos favoring Hancock 45 percent to 41 percent for Romer, reversing earlier results.
Among James Mejia voters in the first round of voting, their preference favored Hancock 43 percent to 39 percent for Romer (RBI Strategies).
Romer has made a major effort to win Hispanic voters using the Mejia endorsement and specific issue appeals. If he is losing or barely winning them, then he probably can’t win the election. They are a key swing group.
See Pew Research Center report: The Latino Electorate in 2010: More Voters, More Non-Voters
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Status of Mayor’s Race – A Week Out
The latest robo poll in the Denver mayor’s race appears to confirm the view that Michael Hancock leads. The best news for Hancock in the poll is not the amount of his lead (49% to 39% for Chris Romer), but the fact he is ahead.
Romer, recognizing he was behind on the day after the general election (May 3), has run an aggressive campaign to raise Hancock’s negative rating and weaken him with key constituencies, including women and liberals, with attacks on Hancock’s statements related to creationism, vouchers and abortion. He’s gone after Latinos with high-profile endorsements, like Federico Peña and James Mejia.
Many of the attack materials have come from an anonymous 527 committee.
If Romer is not ahead 10 days out after his sustained attack, he’s likely going to lose, and it could start to slip away since some of his weaker supporters may stay home or go with the apparent winner – Hancock.
As pointed out in our blog (May 27), Hancock’s win is a product of what Romer understood to be his greatest disadvantage – people like Michael more than him.
One additional fact appears to be Denver’s well-networked liberal community has been able to counteract the relentless Romer attacks with their rapid, but low-key response tactics.
Although Hancock appears to be ahead, the actual point spread as of May 27 could be closer than 10 points. It has been assumed the race would be more like 2,000 votes, or 2 percent. Eleven percent is undecided, and Romer has a base in older voters who are more likely to vote.
See Denver Post article: Michael Hancock has 10-point lead over Chris Romer in Denver mayoral race, poll shows
For May 27 Poll results, click here
Romer, recognizing he was behind on the day after the general election (May 3), has run an aggressive campaign to raise Hancock’s negative rating and weaken him with key constituencies, including women and liberals, with attacks on Hancock’s statements related to creationism, vouchers and abortion. He’s gone after Latinos with high-profile endorsements, like Federico Peña and James Mejia.
Many of the attack materials have come from an anonymous 527 committee.
If Romer is not ahead 10 days out after his sustained attack, he’s likely going to lose, and it could start to slip away since some of his weaker supporters may stay home or go with the apparent winner – Hancock.
As pointed out in our blog (May 27), Hancock’s win is a product of what Romer understood to be his greatest disadvantage – people like Michael more than him.
One additional fact appears to be Denver’s well-networked liberal community has been able to counteract the relentless Romer attacks with their rapid, but low-key response tactics.
Although Hancock appears to be ahead, the actual point spread as of May 27 could be closer than 10 points. It has been assumed the race would be more like 2,000 votes, or 2 percent. Eleven percent is undecided, and Romer has a base in older voters who are more likely to vote.
See Denver Post article: Michael Hancock has 10-point lead over Chris Romer in Denver mayoral race, poll shows
For May 27 Poll results, click here
Will There be More or Fewer Voters in the Runoff?
The Denver electorate was only modestly engaged in the mayor’s election on May 3. Even with the convenience of mail-back voting, only 114,000 managed to participate in the May general election (39% turnout).
It is possible turnout could drop below that figure in the runoff. Typically, competitive elections with advertising and get-out-the-vote efforts draw voters, but the similarity of the two candidates may lower the stakes and leave the enthusiasm of voters. And, the recent poll showing Hancock ahead by 10 points could lower turnout in both camps.
Although it’s early, there does appear to be a large early return. That is not surprising given most people have already voted for their candidate in the general election. In the general election, more than one-third of the vote came in the last two days. As of May 27, 30,000 votes have been returned, 10 percent of the total ballots mailed.
See Denver Post article:
More than 30,500 Denver voters already have voted as of Friday, 10.18 percent
It is possible turnout could drop below that figure in the runoff. Typically, competitive elections with advertising and get-out-the-vote efforts draw voters, but the similarity of the two candidates may lower the stakes and leave the enthusiasm of voters. And, the recent poll showing Hancock ahead by 10 points could lower turnout in both camps.
Although it’s early, there does appear to be a large early return. That is not surprising given most people have already voted for their candidate in the general election. In the general election, more than one-third of the vote came in the last two days. As of May 27, 30,000 votes have been returned, 10 percent of the total ballots mailed.
See Denver Post article:
More than 30,500 Denver voters already have voted as of Friday, 10.18 percent
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)