Contemporary American Public Policy Issues

Will have profound long term impact on American Society for the next two generations

I. Should be partially or completely privatize social security? Bush argued that one third of the current SS taxes (2%) would be available to recipients for their own investments and these investments could be transferred to spouse and family. Some proposals ask for higher amounts.

Maintain the current system:

· Wilbur Cohen in 1935 in midst of depression developed “safety net”

· Today 91% report S.S. as a major source of income

· S.S. accounts for 40% of the aggregate income of seniors, 20% earnings, 18% pensions, 18% assets-----some argue that private sector is reducing access to joint funded pensions, people will have to invest themselves.

· Since 1972 COLAs, the poverty rate for 65+ has been cut in half. Thus, inflation kills federal budget.

· Intergenerational contract, redistributive in nature, some pay in, receive nothing, others draw but never pay in equivalent amount. Thus a social welfare program which emphasizes social and economic goals.

· If people fail to invest or invest unwisely, we will have to create a welfare program for the poor elderly anyway.

Privatize some or all of SS:

· Retirement income is investment and you should be able to put in what you want, take risks if you want, and most importantly transfer the investments to your family.

· Will help stabilize and grow the stock market/bond market since people will invest in it rather than putting $ into SS trust fund. Will be boost to the economy.

· If invest wisely, will actually be able to retire prior to 62. Promotes early retirement.

· “Savers” should not subsidize people who either fail to invest enough or who invest in bad investments. “Savers” should not be punished, they should be rewarded.

· If welfare programs have to be developed for the elderly who fail to take care of their needs, then benefits should only meet minimal needs.

II. Should we privatize our public education system? Use charter schools? Vouchers? Tax credits?

Maintain current system (90% public, 10% private) and avoid privatization

· Will destroy the American public school tradition where everyone is socialized to American culture and values.

· Will waste infra-structure already in place if students move to other schools.

· Classroom mixes will become more segregated over time since students will gravitate to schools where students and families are like their own. Schools will become a value reinforcing not value altering experience. Private and charter schools will “cream”.

· Should public dollars be used for “faith based” schools? Isn’t public funds being used for tuition at religious schools unconstitutional?

· Minorities may be unable to access the better schools in the metro area either because of distance and transportation problems or because they their voucher can not pay the entire bill for the school.

For privatization

· Current schools have monopoly and therefore are not accountable and find it difficult to change.

· Choice will increase competition and competition will increase accountability to students and parents.

· Removes excessive government regulation and gives schools more flexibility to focus on outcomes instead of commonly developed inputs and outputs (type of books, type of seats, number of days, classroom composition, contact hours, etc).

· Instills motivation in school personnel and improves their performance.

· Cost of educating child will go down because of competition.

III. How to fund Public Education? Everyone seems to agree that we need more money for education to compete in a global marketplace.

Are the lottery and gambling casinos the solution? 22 states are currently using the lottery to fund education and four others (Nevada, Mississippi, New Jersey, Michigan) allow gambling. This does not include Indian Reservations.

In favor:

· Stable source of funding in a period when voters are turning down all kinds of tax increases, especially property tax increases.

· Everyone can afford a small amount of leisure time pursuits.

· Lottery system is easy to run. Administratively easier than most other ways of taxing citizens.

· Tourists and out-of-stater’s play the lottery so tax is portable.

· Makes money available for research on addiction.

· Politically less objectionable as more states operate a lottery.

Against:

• Regressive tax on poor.
• Contributes to already high addiction rates.
• Moral argument against gambling.
• Lottery’s follow a cycle, initial growth each year for five years, then level off, and then marginal and slow decline. Legislature used lottery and comes to depend on it but then eventually is faced with increasing taxes at some point in time.
• Drives out legitimate local businesses where gambling is located.
• Increases crime connected to lotteries and gambling.
• Once in place, difficult to get rid of since constituencies fight to keep it.

IV. Do we want to continue to support sprawl in our metropolitan areas? Technically sprawl is the mixing of land uses and the leap-frogging of development which disregards the basic infra-structure needs and density requirements. The Metro areas will the most amount of sprawl according to a recent study are:

· Nashville

· Charlotte

· Greensboro

· Austin

· Atlanta

· Grand Rapids

· Memphis

· Indianapolis

· Orlando

· Houston

· Los Angeles

· Miami and Tampa

For More Sprawl:

· Promotes economic development and prosperity

· Competitive growth allows supply and demand to operate efficiently (you get what you need) Look at Orlando, LA, NY, Miami

· Allows people to live in exclusive communities and neighborhoods.

· Government regulation infringes on private property rights.

Against Sprawl:

· Low density development with uses separated and segregated geographically wastes land and costs more to provide infra-structure like schools, highways, water and sewers, etc. Compact development, high density development is more cost effective with regards to infr-structure. See New Urbanism movement.

· Leap frogging and low density puts enormous pressure on transportation system. 23 states now allow impact fees and two states tried to set up growth boundaries, failed in Ariz., Colorado

· Exclusionary zoning leads to segregation by social class, wealth, ethnicity because of the way annexation and incorporation laws operate.

· Wasted and costly competition for sports franchises, convention centers, tourism, Fortune 500 communities, etc.