No Child Left Behind-- The First Bush Failure

With the election fast approaching, I’m running out of time to pick on my favorite whipping boy, George W. Bush. So today I offer you a trip down memory lane to a time before the Patriot Act, before the Iraq invasion, before the mortgage meltdown, when crude oil was $27.00 a barrel and gas was $1.70 per gallon and the world’s glaciers were all bigger than they are now. Bush’s approval rating back then was well above 50% and it looked like he might luck out and be able to go down in history as just another mediocre president. I offer you a nostalgic look at Bush’s very first failure, that little gem called, No Child Left Behind, and we’ll answer the question, “What happens when an American President with a junior-high-school mentality decides that other people need to become smarter?”

No Child Left Behind, like all government initiatives, is laden with unnecessary complexity and written in management-speak and in-group lingo so as to make it intentionally obtuse and nearly impossible to understand. Its benchmarks are deliberately vague and ambiguous, as are its stated objectives. This makes it hard to cite its most egregious flaws, but I’ll attempt to pull out the worst of what is, overall, quite pathetic.

A school can be sanctioned if more than 40% of the students fall below the 40th percentile. When the rule makers wrote this astounding mandate, some well-intentioned statistician should have stepped forward and explained to them what constitutes a percentile. The 40th percentile of any group is, by definition, the bottom 40% of the group according to whatever is being measured. The membership or makeup of that group can change as individual people improve or slide back, but the bottom 40% will always fall below the 40th percentile. If 45% fall below that mark, then it’s no longer the 40th percentile. It’s the 45th percentile. And there will always be a bottom 40% unless the group is perfectly homogenous. Percentiles don’t exist in homogenous groups since they are a component of variation. A statistically (and mathematically) ambiguous and illogical rule like this helps explain why the students tutored under No Child Left Behind now rank #25 in the world in their mathematics proficiency. Furthermore, I personally believe that the sub-prime foreclosure mess was enabled by a deplorable lack of basic arithmetic understanding in a huge portion of our population. A math illiterate makes an easy financial victim. This stuff matters.

No Child Left Behind also measures sub-groups, like boys, or minorities, or students with IEP's (special education students) — all of whom must be tracked and shown to be improving. One of the ways, certainly not the only way, but in fact a major way that students are identified for special education is their failure to succeed. After the school follows the federal law and identifies these students as failing to succeed, then we punish the school for their failure to succeed. The sad fact is that many truly good schools have been put on the President's watch list for failure to meet all the criteria for special education student improvement. One way to game the system and improve special education scores would be to put students who scored better into the special education programs to boost the average. Wanna guess if any school has tried that? I don't know specifically if it's been done and I hope it hasn't. I suspect, however, that the schools on the watch list for failure to improve special education scores have been too diligent by only allowing truly disabled students into their programs. As a result, their standardized test score averages don't improve very much.

There’s also some sort of rule requiring schools to write goals based on standardized test scores. The goal might be something like, “The percent of 8th grade boys falling below the 40th percentile in Math will decrease in the 20XX - 20XX school year." Or "The average reading score of 4th grade girls will increase for the 20XX school year." Something specific and measurable has to be turned in to the watchdogs. However, it's not too hard to pick out from the current 4th and/or 8th grade classes an area where the students don't succeed well, and then compare that with the current 3rd and 7th grade classes to see if they typically do better. Bingo. There's your goal for next year. This I'm also sure isn't done anywhere. Wanna bet?

It’s all just a game. So let’s look at some results after six years of this Bush initiative. The overall high-school dropout rate across America is now 25%-- the highest since the Great Depression. Admittedly, that rate is artificially elevated by a 70% dropout rate in some inner-city minority student populations. Amazingly, this dropout pattern actually serves to elevate average test scores in some problem schools. Once a slow learner drops out, he or she no longer drags down the average, and by No Child Left Behind standards, things actually look better. I wonder if some young people are ever motivated to drop out because they resent being mere pawns in a heavy-handed government game plan? Seems like a reasonable possibility.

There’s another set of drop outs, however, that cripple the whole public school system. These are the good and competent educators who leave specifically because of No Child Left Behind. Anyone who has been in education for more than ten years can tell you about someone they know personally, another teacher, or in some cases even an administrator who has taken early retirement or made a career change solely to avoid putting up with the absurdity and jumping through the government hoops mandated by No Child Left Behind. It demoralizes the very people needed to make it succeed, and the hideous thing is that it seems to do this by deliberate design. The entire Bush initiative has a paternalistic, justify-your-job tone, similar to what you typically see coming from a corporate HR department when someone is being set up for termination. The implication is that everything deficient in education is the fault of the teachers and administrators.

So what about the finished product? What about the student? And what about the student’s place in America? Human resource hiring managers across America will universally tell you that an American public high school diploma is no longer sufficient for anything above a minimum wage job. That’s leaving a lot of children behind.

Corruption In America's Pharmaceutical Industry

Take an educated guess. Which American institution (not counting the Government) employs the most lawyers? The insurance industry? Real estate? The automobile industry? The travel industry, which would include the air carriers as well as the plane manufacturers? All would be intelligent guesses, and all would be wrong. The answer is the "generic" pharmaceutical industry. The word, "generic," is used to differentiate this from the other pharmaceutical industry which is called, "research based." One employs lawyers, the other employs scientists and marketing people. One consists of drug makers with names that nobody recognizes, and the other is a list of companies like Pfizer and Merck and Johnson & Johnson.

Why so many lawyers? Because they have only one job, but it is gigantic. The generic drug lawyers are charged with breaking patents. Here's how the system works. A big research-based company like Pfizer might spend 30 billion (with a B) dollars each year on research. This work is aimed at discovering new compounds, of which about 1 in 100 eventually proves worthy of development. Of that development group, about 1 in 5 finally makes its way into the marketing machine, and then to doctors and patients. By that time, the original patent protection has been whittled down to something between 10 and 13 years before the patent expires. When the patent expires, the generic drug makers begin to sell their "knock offs" at a greatly reduced price, and the industry statistics show that about 90% of the drug usage switches from the research-based company to the generic company. In other words, the company that discovers and develops the new pharmaceutical has only about 10 to 13 years to recoup the research investment and show a profit from the sales.

The estimated 90% switch to generic label usage upon patent expiration has huge financial implications for the research-based company that holds the patent. Take the case of Pfizer's Lipitor, the largest selling drug in the world. When Lipitor gained FDA approval in 1996, it helped send Pfizer stock value into a stratospheric climb that culminated in 2001 with a price per share over $48, and this was after a three-for-one stock split. 2007 sales for Lipitor exceeded 6 billion dollars, but if the past switching pattern hold true, 90% of this could go to generics in 2010 when the patent expires. This is partly why Pfizer stock closed near $17 last week, nearly down to one third of its 2001 value.

If that's not complex enough, consider this. In addition to just the simple economics, part of the pressure driving patients to switch to generic drugs comes from the U.S. Congress and the AARP- two of America's most powerful institutions. So why should the average person care what happens to the big research-based companies? Because all our lives depend on fresh research, and not just for exotic disease cures. Bacteria constantly mutate, and because of this antibiotics lose their effectiveness over time. If drug companies don't keep pace by developing new antibiotics, we could find ourselves back in a time when simple pneumonia could be a deadly killer. Generic drug makers are not in the research business, and would be of little benefit in such a scenario.

So this cautionary tale has elements of big business, intense competition, huge profits within very limited time frames, lawyers working behind the scenes, monetary choices that effect virtually everyone, and life and death health choices that effect the entire human race. Add to that, an extraordinary complexity of operation and two sides to every issue. All of this makes the total pharmaceutical industry difficult to understand. And when people cannot easily understand something, they tend to suspect corruption. That's where the corruption issue comes into a discussion of America's pharmaceutical industry.

See also
Our Daily Meds
Don't Blame Kindler
Killing The Goose That Lays Golden Eggs

Get Your Free Gas While It Lasts

In 1952, GM honcho, Charlie Wilson, told congress, “What’s good for General Motors is what’s good for the country.” At the time when he said this, his company was already working to eliminate passenger-carrying competition from metropolitan transit systems by buying up the urban trolley companies and transferring the rolling assets to the scrap metal yards across America. Nobody at the time ever tried to explain how this was good for the country, and Wilson’s words were widely quoted and pretty much accepted at face value. Nobody today would buy it.

Yesterday, we saw further evidence of GM’s deterioration, as if any further evidence was needed. The once-proud company eliminated dividends for shareholders, and with GM stock value at an all-time low, this was the last nail in the coffin for the unfortunate people still holding equity investment in the company. Also announced yesterday was the discontinuation of healthcare coverage for GM retirees over 65. I guess Medicare is expected to take up the slack. And, of course, the current honchos will eliminate some white-collar jobs (other than their own) to make it look like management is sharing the pain. I’ll bet GM wishes it now had all that money they spent to dismantle the trolley systems half a century ago.

Less than a year ago, TV advertisements for humongous Chevy pickup trucks were featuring macho cowboy-types at the wheel as the Chevy was pitted against Ford F-Series machines and Dodge Hemis to compare pulling power. You don’t need to be an internal combustion scientist to know that something which can tow a locomotive eats up a lot of gas. So now, with fuel prices higher than ever, General Motors has excess numbers of pickup trucks sitting around with no buyers. Their solution to this is to offer free gas for a short period of time to new buyers—the automotive equivalent of a sub-prime ARM home mortgage. And sure enough, that same kind of cost-camouflaging flim-flam that blindsided financially naïve Americans into home foreclosure now has Chevrolet-owner-wannabes taking the bait. They still want to be that macho cowboy-type at the wheel, at least until the free gas runs out. This is what passes for wise consumerism and automotive industry sales management in the 21st century. It might be good for General Motors, but not for America.

Latest DNCC Update-- Protestors Beware

The “Tip-Of-The-Spear” commandos finally flew out of town in their black helicopters, still insisting that their reason for visiting Denver was to prepare for a possible conflict in the global war on terror (see my blog on June 18). By now, their CPS systems are sufficiently programmed with the anticipated flash points where global terrorists might be likely to spread mischief during the Democratic convention in August. Take heart, however, for the merriment is far from over. The circus is, indeed, coming to town.

Today, the city constables working together with the Secret Service announced that the convention demonstrators will be “partitioned with double prison fences, eight feet high, and spaced eight feet apart so that people on one side cannot pass anything across the barrier” (their actual words). No mention was made of the razor Cortina wire on top of the fences, but I guess this is implied by the term, “prison fence.”

Additionally, there’s a ban on any paraphernalia that can be used to attach protestors to one another. This includes padlocks, bicycle locking chains, carabiners, ropes, pipes, cables, handcuffs, and pretty much any filament longer or stronger than a shoelace. So much for opposition unity. As if this weren’t enough, CCTV (closed circuit) surveillance cameras are reportedly being programmed with new face-recognition software that was developed by an American technology firm under a contract from China for use with their Olympic security systems. It makes you wonder why this much planning and thought wasn’t brought to bear prior to the invasion of Iraq.

Obamas On the Cover of the New Yorker Magazine

During my Independence Day sojourn to the nation’s heartland, I visited the Abraham Lincoln museum in Springfield, Illinois. I highly recommend this as a place of learning. One entire gallery of the spectacular museum is devoted to the political cartoons of the day that were published to attack Lincoln during his presidency, and they are unparalleled for their tastelessness, viciousness, and outright absurdity. The only lasting effect of these cartoons, lampoons, and caricatures was to make their creators and publishers look like idiots in the light of history.

I see a lesson in all this that might apply to the current uproar over the newest cover of the New Yorker magazine lampooning Barack and Michelle Obama as Muslim terrorists. The lasting effect will be to remind readers that the New Yorker editorial staff is delusional, and the magazine cartoonist is no Thomas Nast, but the whole affair should not cost Obama any votes. It’s true that there are people roaming around American streets whose peculiar religiosity has them convinced that Obama is the Antichrist. And there are many American patriots who actually believe that the United States Government keeps them safe, and for these folks, avuncular old John McCain is the iconic embodiment of that fantasy. And finally, there have always been the redneck goobers who listen to Rush Limbaugh three hours every day and think this makes them smart. None of these folks will ever vote for Obama, but not because of the cartoon magazine cover, because a New Yorker magazine is the last thing in the world that they are likely to read.

The New Yorker editors assured us that the whole thing was a parody. I believe this. But a parody is a lie, even though it’s humorous and very subtle. American elections for the last 50 years have always been fought with lies, with the best liar winning the contest. I fault the New Yorker staff for thinking that the average American can spot a subtle parody and realize it’s not the truth.

Management and "Happy Talk" Is Benching the Eagle

Just another day. Nine U.S. soldiers were killed in Afghanistan. Budweiser was sold to InBev, a European beer maker. NYC’s Chrysler Building is now totally owned by Arabs in Abu Dabi, and 20% of the NASDAQ is owned by Arabs in Dubai. Twenty years ago, news like this would have been a cause for an outright revolt against the government, but today such news hardly rates attention. I am firmly convinced that if the U.S.A. were somehow pushed back into the Stone Age, 30% of Americans would still proudly display a patriotic American flag on the wall of their cave and continue to bitch about the opposing political party.

I don’t think that the 2008 election will make any difference whatsoever in the state of the country. No matter who becomes the next president, eight years from now gas will be $7 dollars per gallon, sea level will be two feet higher, and U.S. troops will still be cannon fodder in Middle East garrisons. And American public education, healthcare coverage, and airline travel will still be the worst in the industrialized world, just like it is now.

To support my thesis about the irrelevance of the 2008 election, I offer one simple proof. Just look closely at all the political TV advertisements, and listen closely to what all the candidates are saying. All of them, including McCain and Obama, see themselves as a manager rather than a leader. They talk about their “plans” (what a joke) to solve the nation’s problems, but never ask for the shared sacrifice that will be needed to endure the unsolved problems once the plans fail. Lincoln didn’t try to manage his way through the American Civil War. He worked instead to prepare his people for the worst possible outcome, even as he hoped for the best. FDR, when faced with the Great Depression and World War II, did quite a lot of managing, but still found time to warn the American people that the road out of the quagmire would be difficult and fraught with peril. Neither Lincoln nor FDR relied exclusively on “happy talk.” But then, nobody ever accused any modern politician of being another Abraham Lincoln.

FEMA To The Rescue (Again)

I was told that my last posting was too long, so this will be a short one. I spent Independence Day out in the heartland, near Cedar Rapids, where everyone was effected by the flood to one extent or another. If the mood there can be expressed in one word, the word would be "frustration." Over 2,500 homes are simply gone. Not just uninhabitable, but non-existent. Last week FEMA moved in 40 trailer houses, and to hear the PR spin coming from Washington, you'd think the housing problem was totally solved.

One woman who is both homeless and unemployed (her place of work was destroyed by the flood) told me, "I actually envy the poor people in Myanmar. The government there did nothing. Nothing from a government would be a blessing. Our government moved in and made things worse for us. All we ever hear is how we can't do this or that because it's unsafe. It's not about safety. It's all about control, and forced compliance, and-- above all-- it's about giving the impression that the government knows what's best for us. And to make the situation totally ridiculous, our government scorns the leaders of Myanmar for being dictatorial. First Katrina. Now central Iowa. When everyone in America has eventually had the benefit of firsthand government emergency response, it will be the end of our democracy."

There's nothing I can add to that, except to say, "Pray for the people in central Iowa."