The expanding list of transportation options makes our multi-modal system stronger. All of these services should be lauded for its efforts. There is one catch, however. Each transportation service requires a debit or credit card as a payment option. For the 16.7 percent of Minnesotans who are unbanked or underbanked, debit and credit cards are out of reach.
The FDIC classifies unbanked as those people lacking any kind of deposit account at an insured depository institution such as a savings or checking account. Underbanked housholds have a bank account but also rely on Alternative Financial Services (AFS) like money orders, non-bank check cashing, payday loans, and prepaid debit cards. Each of these services exacts heavy fees, making these services more expensive than traditional banking.
While 16.7 percent of unbanked or underbanked households is too many people with too few options, it is the lowest percentage in the Upper Midwest (Wisconsin is at 18.7 percent). However, like so many of the great successes in Minnesota, there is a large disparity in who shares in that success. Whereas 14.8 percent of family households (as compared to non-family households) were without full banking services, 36.5 percent of households led by a single female were without full banking services. Of those making under $15,000 a year, 58.5 percent were fully banked. Only 39.5 percent of black households were fully banked, compared to 84.7 percent of white households. This is consistant with national disparities where 41.6 percent of black households are fully banked compared to 77 percent of white households. People across the county are working on different ways to give everyone access to banking options.
Chicago has come up with one solution to help those without banking services while serving its transportation mission. The Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) has switched to a new fare payment system called Ventra. Ventra operates similar to the Twin Cities' Metro Transit Go-To card in that a person can buy long term passes and store funds. Its additional feature makes it different. The Ventra card also functions as a prepaid debit card, usable anywhere debit cards are accepted. This may seem like a large jump but in fact is just a continuation of previous services.
The fare cards preceding Ventra, Chicago Card and Go-To, also stored money for later use. The transit service restricted transactions to their proprietary transportation services but the principle of a financial exchange instrument is the same. Eliminating the payment restriction allows people to save money in their transit account just as they would in a traditional bank account. This change would allow those without banking access to the services traditionally accessed though bank accounts.
The transition in Chicago has been controversial, however. The CTA outsourced fare collection and the prepaid debit card system to the private company Ventra rather than keep it agency managed like the Chicago Card. The outsourcing has led to price increases similar to what was experienced when Chicago sold all city parking meters to investment firms. When Ventra took over fare collection for the CTA, single fare tickets increased from $2.25 to $3.00. The one-day pass jumped from $5.75 to $10, a 74% increase. The prepaid debit card is similarly riddled with high costs and hidden fees. Though it is free to activate, Walletnerd.com estimates using the card will cost $188 per year. This is more expensive than most other prepaid debit cards. This is a good reminder that outsourcing government isn’t better for citizens. It might look cheaper on paper, but only because costs are externalized, especially to those already struggling.
Minnesota can improve on Chicago by implementing the system though the Go-To card. Met Transit would expand the functionality of Go-To cards by letting them act as savings accounts. Public oversight from the Met Council would prevent the price gouging seen in Chicago, giving everyone the opportunity for affordable transactional instruments, creating more options for the unbanked and underbanked.
(Banking data from the FDIC 2011 National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households)
After a few decades of writing about economic reports, trends and forecasts, I've learned it is far easier to analyze what went wrong after the sky has fallen, not while it is falling. Simultaneously, it has been obvious over time that we should never assume the current situation won't change in the near or distant future.
What's prompting this is the rash of generally good news we keep getting about recovery in the Minnesota and national economies. But hanging over monthly and quarterly statistical reports of improved jobs and economic progress are warnings that global problems will slow the U.S. economy.
Minnesota's econnomy is a microcosm of the national economy. At the same time, Minnesota is more trade dependent and thus more exposed to the global economy than at least half the U.S. states.
Two reports this past week from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) serve as a warning. On July 23, the IMF said the U.S. economy slowed in the first quarter due to severe weather across much of the nation that, among other things, kept consumers away from shopping. A day later, the IMF revised downward its growth projections for the global economy, citing weaker growth in the U.S., Russia and major developing countries.
The IMF still sees growth through the coming year. But not all forecasters do.
Bernard Condon, writing in the UK's Independent newspaper, reported on economic forecaster David Levy's warning that the U.S. will likely fall into recession in 2015.
Levy, whose family started the Levy Forecast newsletter in 1949, pegged the collapse of the housing bubble and warned that it would lead to what we now call the Great Recession. His grandfather had called the 1929 stock market collapse that became the Great Depression.
One of the most troubling parts of Condon's article is the support the Levy forecast got from Eswar Prasad, a Cornell University economist. Prasad warned that the global economy is unsustainably riding on endless U.S. consumer spending. Future global recession recoveries will not be singularly buoyed or mitigated by US consumers.
Problems abroad can thus boomarang back and take down the U.S. economy.
These are valid points deserving our attenton or concern although there is little Minnesota can do about it except ride out the storms these clouds may bring. From our farms to factories to front offices, Minnesota is a trade dependent state. That is mostly good, but it does leave us vulnerable and makes a compelling case for greater economic diversification.
Congressional conservatives have made it hard to get much done these past few years. This has led to a series of creative workarounds by the Obama administration, including the Race to the Top grant competition five years ago which in part took the place of passing new education legislation. I’m less than thrilled with the program which led to many states agreeing to significant policy changes but only funded a few of those efforts.
Minnesota was not one of the major grant recipients although we did get a smaller Early Learning Challenge Grant in 2011. Five years after Race to the Top, the twelve states receiving the “big” grants (amounting to about one percent of their total education budgets) have spent much of the money. Major priorities include teacher evaluation systems, Common Core adoption and implementation, and beefing up science, math, and technology options.
The federal Department of Education’s Race to the Top priorities meshed in many ways with its conditions for receiving a waiver from No Child Left Behind (NCLB). Together, these two policies sparked a wave of teacher evaluation systems that place more weight on test scores and fed an image of the Common Core as a federal program (even though it was initiated by foundations and the states). If you like analogies, Race to the Top was the carrots and the NCLB waiver process was the stick.
As the carrots run low, the Department of Education is left with the stick although they haven’t threatened most states’ NCLB waivers. It’s a make-do approach to policymaking that has encouraged the rapid adoption of several policies, many of which have struggled as they move to implementation. With a new administration taking over after the 2016 elections, it seems likely that the new President and Secretary of Education will continue to use the waiver process and perhaps the occasional grant competition as a way of promoting their policies. This is especially likely if conservatives continue to choke Congress’ ability to function. Were a conservative policy activist such as Michele Bachmann or Scott Walker become the Secretary of Education, the likely result would not be pretty.
The Race to the Top experiment has shown both the power of competitive grants to provoke policy change and the limitations of those grants in ensuring high-quality implementation. We would be better served by actual education policy set in law.
The United States is unique among the world’s democracies in the relative absence of socialism as an accepted world view and political movement. Unlike most democracies, the U.S. does not have a socialist party capable of winning major elections—a fact that might surprise some Tea Party members who insist that President Barak Obama is himself a socialist!
Yet socialism has played an important role in American history—especially here in Minnesota, where socialists were at the heart of the labor and progressive farm movements, were elected mayors and city council members in both Minneapolis and St. Paul and played a critical role in the foundation of the Farmer-Labor Party.
Signs that history may be repeating itself surfaced in Minneapolis this past November when Ty Moore of Socialist Alternative came within 229 votes of being elected to the city council.
Given the growing divide between the one percent and the rest of us, it is no wonder that socialist ideas are making a comeback. A 2011 poll by Pew Research showed that 49 percent of respondents between the ages of 20 and 29 had a positive view of socialism compared to 43 percent for capitalism.
So why bring socialism out of the closet? What does if offer America and more specifically Minnesota in the current historical moment?
First, socialists believe in class conscious politics and aren’t afraid to use words that reflect that consciousness. When did every American with incomes between $20,000 and $500,000 become middle class? Who erased the term working class from America’s political vocabulary? Naming things as they are is an essential first step to reconnecting working people with the democratic process.
Secondly, socialists refuse to approach public policy with one hand tied behind their back. Not every form of social ownership is a good thing, of course. But the simple act of broadening our public imagination can lead to better public policy ideas. The socialist impulse has given us creative and arguably superior approaches to health care (single payer) professional stadiums (community ownership) and municipal cable. It has given us land trusts in urban neighborhoods, food coops, and commons-based approaches to governing the Great Lakes.
Third, a lived emphasis on the social in socialism is essential to restoring a healthy civic community. Socialism’s core principle is another “S” word —solidarity. As an ideal, socialism is a timely counter to the resurgence of libertarianism, itself a marginal movement (if not a dirty word) only a decade ago.
A 21st century encounter with socialism offers neither the comfort of a uniformly heroic past or a clear-cut road map to a more equitable future. Rather, it offers something more fundamental. Far from being a “dirty word” an honest encounter with socialism as a word, world view and political practice may just be the tonic for a political dialogue worthy of a mature and dynamic society.
2 Comments ->
This is the second in a four-part series. Read part one here.
Every Minnesotan has a stake in the fight to keep the Internet an accessible, open platform. Schools and education groups, however, are particularly vulnerable to the damage of losing net neutrality.
School librarians are notably opposed to Internet service providers tearing down net neutrality access protections. Already strapped for time and resources, the country’s librarians have a unique view on how their jobs could become much harder if net neutrality were lost.
Lynne Bradley, the director of government relations of the American Library Association, quoted in the Washington Post, states, “We can't afford to pay more [to ISPs]. As public institutions, we're being threatened with limited resources and are trying to provide the best possible service we can given the access we currently have.”
As discussed in my earlier post, the ISPs’ proposal eliminating net neutrality would throttle content based on the bits per minute the content provider (such as Netflix, Twitter, CNN.com) offers as well as the amount of money the content providers give to the ISPs distributing it.
This would inherently limit the ability of public institutions and their limited budgets to ensure that all of their students and teachers have access to the educational materials needed to continue learning and teaching.
Rebecca Buerkett, a librarian and technology specialist in a New York public school district, wrote an Education Week article arguing that the loss of net neutrality could harm the equalizing potential of the Internet, aggravating the existing gaps already between students.
She points out that “for students who might otherwise be ‘low on the totem pole, on the Internet, they're the same as everyone else…Protecting good technology access for my students is very important.’”
ISPs may not even deem educational content to be a significant use of their bandwidth. With the proposed change, these corporations could decide on a whim what content deserves to be sped up or slowed down. It isn’t hard to imagine that educational materials could take a back seat to entertainment providers (such as Netflix or gaming services). Our policymakers and education leaders should know that maintaining net neutrality is important for Minnesota’s children.
For a few additional introductions to the complex issue of Net Neutrality, try PBS Idea Channel’s discussion or The VlogBrothers “Net Neutrality Argument in 3 Minutes,” and, most helpfully, Vi Hart’s comprehensive Net Neutrality Review.
Below is a weekly round-up of news, videos and books that our staff and writers are enjoying this week. Enjoy!
From one Hmong family, four of Johnson High's top students (Pioneer Press) — It was enough to make a fellow East Sider want to go out and give his neighbors a big hug. Mila Koumpilova offered an inspiring salute to the Terrific Thaos in Wednesday's Pioneer Press. St. Paul and its Johnson High School are so lucky. Carlton College is, too. Heck, the entire state has a family to look up to, encourage going forward, and try to emulate.
Jon Stewart, one of our greatest political satirists, takes on the Highway Trust Fund fandango in Washington.
The Letters That Warren G. Harding’s Family Didn’t Want You to See (New York Times) — As a budding historian, I am really excited that 29th President of the United States, Warren G. Harding's letters are about to become public. I'm sure that it will offer a more complex view of this controversial man!
Five Ways Unions Are Trying To Get Their Mojo Back (Think Progress) — An encouraging snapshot of union progress across the country.
People Kept Complaining This Restaurant Sucked, Look What They Found Out… (The Meta Picture) -- Here's a very entertaining example of why "blame the workers" isn't always the best default analysis. Also... put down your cell phone and enjoy your meal.
Obituary: Chester Nez (The Economist) -- This obituary tells the story of the last of the Navajo code-talkers, who died last month. These U.S. marines used their native language, which their own government once tried to prevent them from speaking, to help win WWII.
The Surprisingly Predictable Patterns of Random Choice (Science Friday) — We're not good at random; we just think that we are. In fact, we're pretty predictable in getting random wrong. Science Friday.
I just picked up Hilary Clinton's new book and look forward reading it. I've been intrigued with the Clinton's since I first started covering them during their time as governor and first lady of Arkansas.
The Original Tea Partiers: How GOP Insurgents Invented Progressivism (The Atlantic)— Click-bait headline aside, this is an entertaining story of some of "Fighting Bob" La Follette's political battles in Wisconsin early last century. For those looking for an example of a political insurgency that actually did some good, it makes for great reading.
I just finished reading Rough Hewn Land: A Geologic Journey from California to the Rocky Mountains by Keith Heyerdahl Meldahl. It's a pretty fast read that is a very interesting and not overly technical history of essential how the western US, including the Great Plains, was made. The author has a good sense of humor and lots of passion for the subject that drew me in. A nerdy read for sure but incredibly fascinating.
Minnesota treats children well, but not equally. New data about the status of Minnesotan children shows the state’s overall strengths, but the extent of racial disparities is intolerable. It is time for policymakers, teachers, and community leaders to pay better attention to kids of color.
Minnesota ranked fifth in the nation for children’s general well-being in the annual KIDS COUNT report, released July 22. Minnesota has landed in the top five states for overall child well-being for over a decade which definitely warrants a pat on the back.
In general, Minnesota's economy is flourishing, our schools succeed, and our healthcare systems save lives. Compared to much of the US, Minnesota’s children thrive. Still, many non-white kids do not.
“The report found the state has some of the worst disparities in the country, with nearly half of Minnesota’s black children living in poverty,” MPR’s Sasha Aslanian writes.
Individuals below the poverty line are more than double as likely to be non-whites in Minnesota. We cannot forget about the children in impoverished homes, the resources they lack, and their unfair future ahead if nothing changes.
Neighborhoods with high poverty levels often have higher pollution, more crime, and poorer-performing schools. As the amount of Minnesotan children in poverty increases, kids are at a higher risk for health problems and academic failure.
Research on education, healthcare, and family life shows startling racial gaps. Minnesota’s non-white students are less likely to be prepared for kindergarten and almost 40 percent of black and Hispanic students do not reach the 4th grade reading standard, according to the report.
This inequality is a pressing issue that cannot be solved fast enough. Citizens need to pressure their leaders to prioritize growth for children of color—now.
Minnesota must implement stable programs and infrastructure that address racial disparities among children. These changes should originate from local governments and state legislation, as well as school boards and community outreach organizations.
Every child deserves access to Minnesota’s top-ranked resources. By working to solve the current deep-rooted inequality, we can build a better future for all Minnesotans.
Significant praise has been heaped on ridesharing services. Uber, Car2Go, HourCar and NiceRideMN, to name a few, are lauded for increasing transportation options. Each service adds another way to get from point A to B, making our multimodal system stronger. These networks run best when switching from one mode to another is easy and obvious.
Now, however, these services accept payment in different methods. Uber and Lyft charge through a smart phone application. Car2Go and HourCar have membership cards to unlock the vehicles; and NiceRideMN uses a credit card or a membership card. Each of these services uses a different system, making it challenging to switch from one to another. This makes our multi-modal network weaker. There should be one card that works across all platforms, so each mode is easily accessible. The Metro Transit Go-To cards can be that card.
Go-To cards already make for a more efficient public transportation system. They can be used as a monthly pass or as stored value, so no accidentally throwing out a needed transfer. With only a quick swipe needed for payment, boarding the bus is faster. When money is added to the card, an extra 10 percent is added, making taking the bus an even cheaper option than driving. With a solid track record of success, expanding Go-To cards to all the transportation options just makes sense.
The expansion would benefit many regular Go-To card users. Many high school students use a Go-To card everyday. Since 2013, all public school buses to high schools have been discontinued and replaced with Go-To passes. The collaboration between Met Transit and Minneapolis Public Schools gives each eligible student a Go-To card that provides rides between 5:00am and 10:00pm. Adding the other multi-modal options to the card improves access for these students. It facilitates students to take the bus to the library or a museum and take a NiceRide the last 5 blocks, making the city a classroom for all students.
Let’s expand Go-To cards to NiceRides and car-sharing services like Uber and HourCar. Adding Go-To cards to other transportation services would strengthen our multimodal transportation system helping people connect to destinations in a way that works for them.
Minnesota's "Queen Mother of Comedy," the late, great Merrilyn Belgum, used to crack about how tough it was to get old. "I can't see or hear," she'd say. "Thank God, I can still drive!"
I was reminded of this wry observation and its transportation policy implications when a Minnesota 2020 colleague alerted me to a recent Minnesota House Research report entitled "Older Drivers"—shortly before I was due for my driver's license renewal.
As someone who's doing really well for an old man on Medicare, I didn't know whether to take that as a hint or not. Regardless, I passed the vision test and was granted another four years behind the wheel.
As I've found so often in my Baby Boomer lifetime, I'm part of a serious trend. According to the report, the number of Minnesotans over the ages of both 65 and 85, respectively, is expected to double from 2010 levels by 2035. By 2030, 69 of the state's 87 counties will have an elderly population of more than 20 percent. In recent years, the traffic crash and fatality rates for older drivers has been declining, but the percentage of overall crashes involving us geezers has been rising.
Historically, crash rates are the highest among the drivers at each end of the age spectrum. Minnesota and most other states have attacked the problem for the young-'uns with a number of policy changes in recent years and continue to strengthen restrictions on them.
Similar measures targeting elders are few and far between. While youthful recklessness is implicated and addressed, there's been little response to the declining vision, hearing, cognitive ability, motor function and physical resilience that may come with advancing age.
In fact, Minnesota law specifically prohibits extra driving examinations based on age. A few states have required a new road test for older drivers, required doctors to report medical conditions that could impair driving and shortened the renewal cycle beyond a certain age. According to the House report, Minnesota mandates several renewal policies—a relatively short 4-year cycle and in-person application and vision tests—for all drivers regardless of age.
Our state does allow case-by-case evaluation of licensees based on reports of potential driving impediments received from family members, police or physicians. Still, a significant protection against seniors driving badly is just self-regulation, voluntary restriction of time behind the wheel, according to the report. An 88-year-old friend of mine has done just that, relying instead on his bicycle to get around his south Minneapolis haunts.
"The increase in older Minnesota drivers will likely continue to raise various policy questions," the House report concludes, noting that potential responses need not be limited to driving privileges alone. Attention should be paid as well to "the capacity and geographic distribution of other transportation options (such as transit service)," it adds.
And that's a refreshing step outside the box of autocentric thinking that permeates our culture. My city-dwelling friend can ride his bike or the bus to practically anywhere he needs to go. But greater percentages of the elderly live in Greater Minnesota, where distances are daunting, transit service is sparse and what exists is heavily used by older folks. Road crash and fatality rates also are much higher outside the Twin Cities. Minnesota is a national leader in providing rural transit, but it will need continuing improvements in that area as the population ages.
“Blended learning” is one of those buzzwords that flies around the edu-sphere. Done right, the combination of in-person and online education, often spread between time in school and time at home, has real potential to aid in helping each student learn at their own pace. Done incorrectly, it turns into a frustrating waste of time and money. A pilot project at a handful of schools in Oakland, CA, recently got some attention from Education Next. The story highlights key areas that districts considering blended learning should remember.
The first of these is the central role of teachers in making a pedagogical shift of any kind happen. In the Oakland blended learning example, according to Education Next, “all the teachers within the schools that implemented blended learning were “early adopters” who wanted to try something new.” It’s tough to overstate the significance of voluntary adoption in place of top-down mandates for creating positive changes in teaching. If a change is successful, those early adopters can become local experts, helping other teachers who have become interested master the new approach (especially in schools and districts that prioritize local, teacher-led professional development).
Time is another critical consideration. The roll-out of blended learning in Oakland wasn’t a rush job. It certainly wasn’t the kind of massive, district-wide technology purchase like the $2 million iPad boondoggle in Los Angeles or the bulk iPad purchases many Minnesota districts have made or discussed. Instead, different schools in the Oakland pilot tried different tools, learning from each others' successes and failures. This is the kind of deliberate pacing that allows teachers, principals, and district administrators to learn and make informed choices as they work for change, rather than betting big on one fast, big purchase.
Finally, the Oakland experiment realized the importance of training. Teachers spent at least an extra hour a week on training and collaboration. The foundation footing the bill made specialists available, especially to schools that struggled the most. The current goal is to adapt the early lessons into training and coaching support for expanding the approach.
The importance of teachers, time, and training aren’t just important for blended learning. They’re important to all major changes in how teaching and learning happen in schools. We need a school system that trusts teachers as leaders and gives them the time and training they need to make education better.