WHEN YOU SAY "ALTRUISM" TO ME, BUDDY, YOU BETTER SMILE: Chas Rich at NEO babble gets into some heavy snark about the Cronin/Stuber op-ed I linked in my last post. Chas thinks Kevin and Angela are insufficiently "altruistic" (i.e. just trying to get money for their programs) and that there's no reason to expect SBC to provide broadband service in less dense, poorer parts of their market. He apparently likes the idea of getting SBC to butt out of municipal broadband investments, though.
Well, I helped draft the proposals he doesn't like as well as the one he does, and I make no claim of "altruism" in the matter. I damn well do want more support for Digital Vision's member computer centers as well as community networking efforts like Tremont WiFi. I think SBC should help provide it if they want to keep their privileged position in Ohio's telecom market while merging with one of their major competitors.
And yes, I think broadband Internet access is now a necessity for many households and a basic telecom service for all. If SBC wants to be a privileged "incumbent provider" and buy out competitors at the same time, they should at least be required to get that basic service rolled out to all their customers in affordable configurations... which, at this point, they haven't.
So Chas, you want to step outside and settle this? I propose a debate on the subject. In fact, I propose making it a Meet The Bloggers event (sorry, George and Tim, but if we can't get Jackson and Campbell in the same ring why not me and Chas?)
Come on, Chas, you and me. I'll buy the first two rounds of coffee.
11.03.2005
PUCO DECISION IS IMMINENT ON SBC/AT&T MERGER: The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio is scheduled to rule tomorrow on the request by SBC and AT&T to approve their operation as a merged telecom provider in Ohio.
Ohio is one of two states where PUCs are still pursuing real investigations before applying the rubber stamp. The other is California, where the regulators issued a "proposed decision" two weeks ago approving the merger, but attaching some conditions proposed by consumer and community technology advocates.
A similar list of conditions is on the table in Ohio, put forward by a coalition that includes the Ohio Consumers' Counsel, community groups from Dayton and the Appalachian region, and two Cleveland groups represented by Joe Meissner of Legal Aid -- the Neighborhood Environmental Council and the Coalition for Fair Utility Rates. They're basically about broadband affordability and access for residents of Ohio's central cities as well as rural areas. (I had a hand in putting the list together as board president of the Ohio Community Computing Network, which consulted and provided testimony for some of the community intervenors.)
A few of the proposed conditions:
Will the PUCO include any of this in its ruling tomorrow? It's not outside the realm of possibility. Their meeting starts at 10 am tomorrow, and I'm told it's viewable by real-time webcast -- check here to see if that's true. And stay tuned.
P.S. To see the Ohio consumer parties' entire proposal, download the whole brief here (it's a pdf file). The proposed conditions start on page 49.
Ohio is one of two states where PUCs are still pursuing real investigations before applying the rubber stamp. The other is California, where the regulators issued a "proposed decision" two weeks ago approving the merger, but attaching some conditions proposed by consumer and community technology advocates.
A similar list of conditions is on the table in Ohio, put forward by a coalition that includes the Ohio Consumers' Counsel, community groups from Dayton and the Appalachian region, and two Cleveland groups represented by Joe Meissner of Legal Aid -- the Neighborhood Environmental Council and the Coalition for Fair Utility Rates. They're basically about broadband affordability and access for residents of Ohio's central cities as well as rural areas. (I had a hand in putting the list together as board president of the Ohio Community Computing Network, which consulted and provided testimony for some of the community intervenors.)
A few of the proposed conditions:
No more efforts by the merged company to restrict investments in broadband networks by local governmentsKevin Cronin, a longtime community tech advocate here, and Angela Stuber of OCCN submitted an op-ed about all this to the Plain Dealer the week before last. It hasn't appeared in print, but strangely enough it's been posted since Monday in the PD's "other columns" section at cleveland.com.
Universal availability of DSL internet service for residents throughout the SBC service territory, within three years
A combined Lifeline rate of no more than $25 for basic telephone and broadband service for low-income homes
Funding support for community technology centers in low-income areas, as well as nonprofit community networking efforts
Will the PUCO include any of this in its ruling tomorrow? It's not outside the realm of possibility. Their meeting starts at 10 am tomorrow, and I'm told it's viewable by real-time webcast -- check here to see if that's true. And stay tuned.
P.S. To see the Ohio consumer parties' entire proposal, download the whole brief here (it's a pdf file). The proposed conditions start on page 49.
11.02.2005
DEMOCRACY REDUCTION: Well, I still haven't heard back from Mr. Kirsanow or anyone else from the Ohio Citizens' League, so I haven't seen an actual copy of their petition, but someone just gave me a copy of a fax of the language. Assuming it's the real thing, here's the key change it would make to the Cleveland City Charter:
I think it's fair to call that a two-thirds reduction in the democracy available to Cleveland citizens.
The seven new wards would have to be drawn right away, even though the current 21 wards would remain in place until the next election in 2009. So any Council Member who wanted to win one of those seven redrawn seats, let alone one of the four at-large, would have to spend his or her entire term raising money and getting known to voters outside his or her own ward. Good luck getting your Councilman on the phone for the next four years!
Of course, potential campaign bankrollers like Tony George, Michael Gibbons, and Peter Kirsanow's partners at Benesch, Friedlander -- not to mention Sam Miller, Dave Daberko, Dan Moore, Mal Mixon, Ed Crawford, etc. etc. -- would have no such problem.
Which is the whole, you know, point.
So... will this monstrosity make it onto the ballot? Probably yes. A charter amendment petition only requires signatures equivalent to 10% of the votes cast in the last regular municipal election. That'll be the one coming up, in which the turnout could easily be less than 70,000. So 7,000 to 8,000 valid signatures are probably all the Ohio Citizens' League needs to force a vote -- maybe in the Spring 2006 primary, maybe earlier.
Can it pass? Trying to cut direct Council representation by two-thirds seems like a pretty big stretch, maybe an overreach. But maybe Kirsanow and company don't care. Maybe the idea is just to keep all the Democrats in Cleveland busy and distracted next year, when the GOP wants us to focus as little as possible on the statewide election. You have to admit that would be pretty clever.
Funny thing is, there's a regular, mandatory twenty-year review of the whole City Charter coming up in 2008, a year before the next Council election. It's laid out in Chapter 39 of the Charter, right after the description of the Charter amendment initiative process. You'd think the Citizens' League folks would have noticed it when they were researching their petition. You'd think they might have said: "Oh, look... here's a process for raising our concerns about the size of City Council in an open, orderly way. Let's start educating and organizing people to participate in the Charter Review."
But for some reason, they didn't. Maybe they just didn't notice that next paragraph. Who can say?
You could ask them if they show up outside your polling place with the Democracy Reduction Petition next Tuesday.
The Legislative power of the City, except as reserved to the people by this Charter, shall be vested in a Council, consisting of four (4) members elected at large and seven (7) members of which shall be elected from separate wards.So, if this thing passes, the population of a Cleveland Council ward jumps from around 22,000 (the size of Solon or Brookpark) to more than 60,000 (bigger than Lakewood).
I think it's fair to call that a two-thirds reduction in the democracy available to Cleveland citizens.
The seven new wards would have to be drawn right away, even though the current 21 wards would remain in place until the next election in 2009. So any Council Member who wanted to win one of those seven redrawn seats, let alone one of the four at-large, would have to spend his or her entire term raising money and getting known to voters outside his or her own ward. Good luck getting your Councilman on the phone for the next four years!
Of course, potential campaign bankrollers like Tony George, Michael Gibbons, and Peter Kirsanow's partners at Benesch, Friedlander -- not to mention Sam Miller, Dave Daberko, Dan Moore, Mal Mixon, Ed Crawford, etc. etc. -- would have no such problem.
Which is the whole, you know, point.
So... will this monstrosity make it onto the ballot? Probably yes. A charter amendment petition only requires signatures equivalent to 10% of the votes cast in the last regular municipal election. That'll be the one coming up, in which the turnout could easily be less than 70,000. So 7,000 to 8,000 valid signatures are probably all the Ohio Citizens' League needs to force a vote -- maybe in the Spring 2006 primary, maybe earlier.
Can it pass? Trying to cut direct Council representation by two-thirds seems like a pretty big stretch, maybe an overreach. But maybe Kirsanow and company don't care. Maybe the idea is just to keep all the Democrats in Cleveland busy and distracted next year, when the GOP wants us to focus as little as possible on the statewide election. You have to admit that would be pretty clever.
Funny thing is, there's a regular, mandatory twenty-year review of the whole City Charter coming up in 2008, a year before the next Council election. It's laid out in Chapter 39 of the Charter, right after the description of the Charter amendment initiative process. You'd think the Citizens' League folks would have noticed it when they were researching their petition. You'd think they might have said: "Oh, look... here's a process for raising our concerns about the size of City Council in an open, orderly way. Let's start educating and organizing people to participate in the Charter Review."
But for some reason, they didn't. Maybe they just didn't notice that next paragraph. Who can say?
You could ask them if they show up outside your polling place with the Democracy Reduction Petition next Tuesday.
11.01.2005
REBECCA RYAN MEETS THE BLOGGERS (AND SHE'S NOT EVEN RUNNING FOR MAYOR)
"THE Gen-Xpert" who is "moving the American workplace to its next threshold of success" (it says so right here on her business card) comes off in this MTB conversation as a nice, intelligent, level-headed young entrepreneur/researcher who's just trying to share her data.
Well, okay... but what's all this on the website about how "her brilliance in presenting [trends] to professionals at all levels, makes her one of America's most captivating communicators and futurists"?
Can you say "cognitive dissonance"?
In case you missed it, Ryan raised some dust in Akron recently by taking a six-digit fee to produce a report for the Chamber of Commerce on how to make the city more attractive to "Gen-Xers". Her eighteen top recommendations are here. Her harshest Akron blogcritic is here.
"THE Gen-Xpert" who is "moving the American workplace to its next threshold of success" (it says so right here on her business card) comes off in this MTB conversation as a nice, intelligent, level-headed young entrepreneur/researcher who's just trying to share her data.
Well, okay... but what's all this on the website about how "her brilliance in presenting [trends] to professionals at all levels, makes her one of America's most captivating communicators and futurists"?
Can you say "cognitive dissonance"?
In case you missed it, Ryan raised some dust in Akron recently by taking a six-digit fee to produce a report for the Chamber of Commerce on how to make the city more attractive to "Gen-Xers". Her eighteen top recommendations are here. Her harshest Akron blogcritic is here.
MESSAGE TO PETER KIRSANOW: I sent this last Thursday evening to the Benesch, Friedlander email address of Peter Kirsanow, spokesman for the Ohio Citizens' League petition drive to reduce Cleveland City Council:
Dear Mr. Kirsanow,No response so far. Three business days and counting.
I am writing to you as the spokesman for the Ohio Citizens' League in the
recent WEWS story about the League's petition campaign to change the size of
Cleveland City Council.
I have been unable to find a phone number, address or website for the Ohio
Citizens' League, but I gather you are one of its leaders. Could you please tell
me how I can obtain a copy of the League's Council reduction petition?
Thank you.
10.31.2005
STRICKLAND TO MEET THE BLOGGERS: Congressman Ted Strickland, one of the leading candidates for the Democratic nomination for Governor, has committed to Meet The Bloggers on December 1. What do you want us to ask?
More at BFD.
More at BFD.
FORTY WORDS OR LESS: Here are the four questions the Plain Dealer thought were most important to ask Cleveland City Council candidates for a special "Election 2005" section yesterday (never mind that they actually printed the wrong questions):
Memo to the editors of the Plain Dealer: In forty words or less, please explain exactly how you decided that the largely theoretical issue of "regional services" should take priority over the following questions for Council candidates:
Mayor Jane Campbell recently launched a "zero-blight initiative" to deal with vacant housing in Cleveland. Do you feel the plan is adequate? If not, what steps would you take to deal with vacant homes?Forty words or less? The fourth question itself is forty-nine words long. How the hell would anyone give a meaningful answer to any of these questions in forty words?
In 40 words or less, please explain what more Cleveland can do to lure businesses and jobs.
In 40 words or less, cite specific actions you would take to reduce drug dealing and nuisance crimes such as vandalism, loud music and loitering, in city neighborhoods.
Many suburbs in Greater Cleveland are debating forms of regionalism, such as merging fire services, sharing equipment, sharing recreation facilities, creating a countywide recreation district, to reduce the cost of services. Should Cleveland be a part of these discussions? In 40 words or less, please explain why or why not.
Memo to the editors of the Plain Dealer: In forty words or less, please explain exactly how you decided that the largely theoretical issue of "regional services" should take priority over the following questions for Council candidates:
As a member of City Council you would effectively control hundreds of thousands of dollars in annual "ward allocations" of CDBG and infrastructure funds. What process would you use to determine the uses of this money each year?Remember, your answer will be edited if it exceeds forty words. Thanks for your prompt response.
Do you think there should be fewer City Council members? How would you react to the current Ohio Citizens' League petition to cut the number of ward council seats in half?
Please explain the proper relationship between a City Council member and the community development corporation, if any, working in your ward.
As a Council member, would you support a new convention center plan that required the imposition of taxes on your constituents? Under what circumstances?
Next Summer, Council will be asked to approve a cable TV franchise renewal and transfer from Adelphia to Time-Warner. Do you have any concerns or proposals to bring to this process? What are your goals, if any, for telecommunications and information technology development in your ward?
Do you agree with the idea of city-imposed limits or living wage requirements on big box grocery stores being built in the city? If not, what would you do, if anything, to promote the survival of neighborhood grocery stores?
What are your plans to help the residents of your ward deal with energy costs, if any? Specifically discuss the role of the city-owned electric utility.
What are your specific plans, if any, to improve the education and income prospects of the poorest 25% of your ward's residents?
10.27.2005
A SEINFELD ELECTION: Kudos to Chas Rich for his point-by-point blogging of last night's mayoral debate... if "debate" is the right word. Do these two disagree about anything except what they think of each other?
This is coming off as the Seinfeld Show of elections -- an election about nothing. An election about relationship issues.
What would Frank Jackson try to do as mayor that Jane Campbell is against? What would Campbell try to do in a second term that Jackson opposes? I don't mean like who'll get a contract, who'll get a job, whose program will gain or lose funding, who'll get the mayor's ear. These questions matter intensely to lots of insiders on either side... but don't matter at all to most potential voters, whose political self-interests revolve around safety, neighborhood services, economic opportunity, their kids, their utility and tax bills. What important differences are there between the two candidates' records and promises on these basic concerns?
If this "debate" was any guide, the answer is -- no important differences at all.
Which was undoubtedly the main cause of the record low primary turnout, as well as the record low general election turnout that everyone seems to expect (present company included). If you can't tell the candidates apart, why vote?
This is coming off as the Seinfeld Show of elections -- an election about nothing. An election about relationship issues.
What would Frank Jackson try to do as mayor that Jane Campbell is against? What would Campbell try to do in a second term that Jackson opposes? I don't mean like who'll get a contract, who'll get a job, whose program will gain or lose funding, who'll get the mayor's ear. These questions matter intensely to lots of insiders on either side... but don't matter at all to most potential voters, whose political self-interests revolve around safety, neighborhood services, economic opportunity, their kids, their utility and tax bills. What important differences are there between the two candidates' records and promises on these basic concerns?
If this "debate" was any guide, the answer is -- no important differences at all.
Which was undoubtedly the main cause of the record low primary turnout, as well as the record low general election turnout that everyone seems to expect (present company included). If you can't tell the candidates apart, why vote?
WHO'S THE "OHIO CITIZENS' LEAGUE"? On Tuesday Channel 5 ran a story about the newest petition to reduce the size of Cleveland City Council. The sponsoring group is something called the "Ohio Citizens' League", represented in the WEWS piece by a guy named Pete Kirsanow.
There's no such organization in the Cleveland phone book. Google finds nothing for "Ohio Citizens' League" but rehashes of the WEWS story and another, shorter one from Channel 3. But a search of the Secretary of State's nonprofit corporation database yields the following:
The Ohio Citizen's League was incorporated less than six months ago, in May 2005, though the name was reserved in 2004. Its three incorporators were Thomas T. George, 18605 Detroit Avenue, Lakewood; Michael E. Gibbons, 1111 Superior Avenue, Suite 900, Cleveland; and Peter N. Kirsanow, 2300 BP Tower, 200 Public Square, Cleveland.
Gibbons is Senior Managing Director and Chairman of Brown Gibbons Lang & Company, a major Republican donor, and a resident of Fairview Park.
"Thomas T. George" is Tony George, the millionaire Lakewood restaurant owner and political player (18605 Detroit is the address of his Harry Buffalo bar), who apparently lives in Westlake.
Kirsanow is a partner at Benesch Friedlander, a controversial Bush appointee to the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, and a national activist and spokesman for Republicanism in the black community. Unlike the other two incorporators, Mr. Kirsanow lives in Cleveland, which probably explains why he's the public face of the petition campaign.
These are the guys leading the charge for less direct, face-to-face representation of Cleveland citizens at City Hall. Kind of makes you think, doesn't it?
(John Ryan blogged his suspicions on Tuesday.)
There's no such organization in the Cleveland phone book. Google finds nothing for "Ohio Citizens' League" but rehashes of the WEWS story and another, shorter one from Channel 3. But a search of the Secretary of State's nonprofit corporation database yields the following:
The Ohio Citizen's League was incorporated less than six months ago, in May 2005, though the name was reserved in 2004. Its three incorporators were Thomas T. George, 18605 Detroit Avenue, Lakewood; Michael E. Gibbons, 1111 Superior Avenue, Suite 900, Cleveland; and Peter N. Kirsanow, 2300 BP Tower, 200 Public Square, Cleveland.
Gibbons is Senior Managing Director and Chairman of Brown Gibbons Lang & Company, a major Republican donor, and a resident of Fairview Park.
"Thomas T. George" is Tony George, the millionaire Lakewood restaurant owner and political player (18605 Detroit is the address of his Harry Buffalo bar), who apparently lives in Westlake.
Kirsanow is a partner at Benesch Friedlander, a controversial Bush appointee to the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, and a national activist and spokesman for Republicanism in the black community. Unlike the other two incorporators, Mr. Kirsanow lives in Cleveland, which probably explains why he's the public face of the petition campaign.
These are the guys leading the charge for less direct, face-to-face representation of Cleveland citizens at City Hall. Kind of makes you think, doesn't it?
(John Ryan blogged his suspicions on Tuesday.)
10.26.2005
POLICY MATTERS REPORT: 22,000 POTENTIAL OHIO JOBS IN RENEWABLE ENERGY
I missed it but Hypothetically Speaking didn't. Policy Matters released a study Tuesday detailing potential Ohio job creation under the national renewable energy investment plan advocated by the Apollo Alliance. More than 5,000 of those jobs could be in Cuyahoga, Lorain and Summit Counties.
The premise of these calculations is a $72 billion national investment in "50,000 megawatts of wind energy, 9,260 megawatts of photovoltaic or solar energy, 8,700 megawatts of biomass energy, and 6,077 megawatts of geothermal energy". Of course, this premise is, well, hypothetical. But the Policy Matters/Apollo study shows in detail how specific Ohio industries and counties would benefit from turning that hypothetical into a reality.
Given the unending brutal impact of high natural gas and electric bills on Cleveland consumers, and the massive flow of energy dollars out of the Northeast Ohio economy, it's remarkable that energy efficiency and local sourcing still rank so low on Cleveland's economic agenda. (For example, neither of the two candidates for Mayor is saying anything at all about these issues.) Maybe the Policy Matters report will help break the silence.
I missed it but Hypothetically Speaking didn't. Policy Matters released a study Tuesday detailing potential Ohio job creation under the national renewable energy investment plan advocated by the Apollo Alliance. More than 5,000 of those jobs could be in Cuyahoga, Lorain and Summit Counties.
The premise of these calculations is a $72 billion national investment in "50,000 megawatts of wind energy, 9,260 megawatts of photovoltaic or solar energy, 8,700 megawatts of biomass energy, and 6,077 megawatts of geothermal energy". Of course, this premise is, well, hypothetical. But the Policy Matters/Apollo study shows in detail how specific Ohio industries and counties would benefit from turning that hypothetical into a reality.
Given the unending brutal impact of high natural gas and electric bills on Cleveland consumers, and the massive flow of energy dollars out of the Northeast Ohio economy, it's remarkable that energy efficiency and local sourcing still rank so low on Cleveland's economic agenda. (For example, neither of the two candidates for Mayor is saying anything at all about these issues.) Maybe the Policy Matters report will help break the silence.
10.25.2005
"In the prevailing myth, Parks decides to act almost on a whim, in isolation. She's a virgin to politics, a holy innocent. The lesson seems to be that if any of us suddenly got the urge to do something equally heroic, that would be great. Of course most of us don't, so we wait our entire lives to find the ideal moment.
"Parks's real story conveys a far more empowering moral. She begins with seemingly modest steps. She goes to a meeting, and then another. Hesitant at first, she gains confidence as she speaks out. She keeps on despite a profoundly uncertain context, as she and others act as best they can to challenge deeply entrenched injustices, with little certainty of results. Had she and others given up after her tenth or eleventh year of commitment, we might never have heard of Montgomery.
"Parks's journey suggests that change is the product of deliberate, incremental action, whereby we join together to try to shape a better world. Sometimes our struggles will fail, as did many earlier efforts of Parks, her peers, and her predecessors. Other times they may bear modest fruits. And at times they will trigger a miraculous outpouring of courage and heart -- as happened with her arrest and all that followed. For only when we act despite all our uncertainties and doubts do we have the chance to shape history."Paul Loeb, "The Real Rosa Parks"
CAMPBELL CAMPAIGN E-MAIL: CHANNEL 3 POLL SHOWS JACKSON AHEAD BY 20 POINTS
The following just arrived in a "Campbell for Cleveland" email:
Update: The WKYC poll story is now posted here. The full results are here. It's easy to see why the Campbell campaign reacted so defensively. If these numbers are even approximately accurate, the Mayor is fried.
If Jerry Austin has a poll that looks "dead even" and wants to argue methodology, he'd better release the whole thing right now.
The following just arrived in a "Campbell for Cleveland" email:
This evening Channel 3 will broadcast the results of their recent poll...Actually, SurveyUSA's polling for Channel 3 was extremely accurate in the primary.
The results they will broadcast are fallacious. Jackson 54 - Campbell
34 and here's why.
The demographics which should be 50/50 east and west and 50/50 black
and white are:
61% east
54 % black
15% seniors
60 % under 49.
The senior number is ridiculous. Seniors and over 50 year olds are the
largest voting blocks.
Our internal poll completed last week showed the race dead even.
Update: The WKYC poll story is now posted here. The full results are here. It's easy to see why the Campbell campaign reacted so defensively. If these numbers are even approximately accurate, the Mayor is fried.
If Jerry Austin has a poll that looks "dead even" and wants to argue methodology, he'd better release the whole thing right now.
10.24.2005
HEY BRENT, IS THIS EAST 110TH OR WEST 110TH?
The Plain Dealer's ponderous editorial endorsements in Cleveland Council races might carry a little more weight if they could just get the ward numbers right.
Kevin Conwell represents Ward 9.
The Plain Dealer's ponderous editorial endorsements in Cleveland Council races might carry a little more weight if they could just get the ward numbers right.
Kevin Conwell represents Ward 9.
10.23.2005
BRAIN DRAIN OR BRAIN BOTTLENECK?
For the last few weeks I've had the pleasure of working with a group, led by County Treasurer Jim Rokakis, that's looking into a possible county college loan initiative. Recently we asked NODIS, the local census gurus at Cleveland State, to run some crosstabulations on county residents' college enrollment by household income. Here's what we got back: According to the 2000 Census, among all 17 to 25-year-old county residents with high school diplomas or GEDs but no college degree, only 37% were currently enrolled in college.
Here are the percentages by household income range (local households only -- out-of-county residents living in dorms here are not included.)
I was astonished by these numbers, especially for the kids from upper-middle-income homes ($60,000+) who seem to be blowing off higher education by a 55%-45% margin. But my college-age kids were not surprised at all -- especially the Hathaway Brown graduate who left Kent State after a year and has recently been delivering pizzas to make her car payments while waiting to start a phone gig at Progressive. And Rokakis gave me a copy of an article from the November Atlantic Monthly (of which only the first few paragraphs are on line) containing this chilling factoid:
Is it possible that our real problem is not the Brain Drain after all, but a Brain Bottleneck somewhere between high school graduation and that next diploma?
Just wondering.
For the last few weeks I've had the pleasure of working with a group, led by County Treasurer Jim Rokakis, that's looking into a possible county college loan initiative. Recently we asked NODIS, the local census gurus at Cleveland State, to run some crosstabulations on county residents' college enrollment by household income. Here's what we got back: According to the 2000 Census, among all 17 to 25-year-old county residents with high school diplomas or GEDs but no college degree, only 37% were currently enrolled in college.
Here are the percentages by household income range (local households only -- out-of-county residents living in dorms here are not included.)
I was astonished by these numbers, especially for the kids from upper-middle-income homes ($60,000+) who seem to be blowing off higher education by a 55%-45% margin. But my college-age kids were not surprised at all -- especially the Hathaway Brown graduate who left Kent State after a year and has recently been delivering pizzas to make her car payments while waiting to start a phone gig at Progressive. And Rokakis gave me a copy of an article from the November Atlantic Monthly (of which only the first few paragraphs are on line) containing this chilling factoid:If you hope to obtain a bachelor's degree by age twenty-four, your chances are roughly one in two if you come from a family with an annual income over $90,000; roughly one in four if your family's income falls between $61,000 and $90,000; and slightly better than one in ten if it is between $35,000 and $61,000. For high schoolers whose families make less than $35,000 a year the chances are around one in seventeen.Hmmmmm. Now I know that the Northeast Ohio Post-College Brain Drain has become an article of faith, if not dogma, for the keepers of our civic religion. And I'm really not looking to get heretical (again!) just for the sake of wearing those cool thumbscrews. But... is it possible, just possible, that our region's shortage of college graduates would be best addressed by getting lots more of our kids into and through college, rather than desperately attempting to hold onto a few more of those who've made it?
Is it possible that our real problem is not the Brain Drain after all, but a Brain Bottleneck somewhere between high school graduation and that next diploma?
Just wondering.
10.22.2005
WHILE I WAS GONE: Brewed Fresh Daily is still rebuilding from whatever hit him in the wake of Hurricane Copfer and Hurricane Rokakis (I missed the Meetup so I'll probably never know), but his commenters have been conducting a graduate seminar in Cleveland city contracting for the last couple of days.
SPORTS BLOGGERS: Frank Lewis at the Free Times asked me in an email if I know of any good Cleveland sports bloggers. Of course I know Tim Russo's Cleveland Scores and Chas Rich's Pitt Sports Blather, but otherwise I find myself at a loss for links. Ideas?
Update: Jeff Hess sent me an email to report that he couldn't post a comment here. Sure enough, enetation is screwing up again. Jeff wrote: Don't forget Tony Montana at Blast Furnace. I love his sports writing and I hate sports.
Anybody else with a favorite sports blog link? Here's my email. Thanks!
Update: Jeff Hess sent me an email to report that he couldn't post a comment here. Sure enough, enetation is screwing up again. Jeff wrote: Don't forget Tony Montana at Blast Furnace. I love his sports writing and I hate sports.
Anybody else with a favorite sports blog link? Here's my email. Thanks!
10.17.2005
RYAN HITS THE BLOGOSPHERE RUNNING: After a couple of stumbles on the Blogger learning curve, John Ryan seems to have found his "Publish Post" key. The Cleveland AFL-CIO leader's new blog has entries about a Plain Dealer carrier who's no longer on the route, a Cleveland Heights candidate who lost her labor endorsement -- and a heads-up about a public meeting on sites for the proposed Convention Center.
10.13.2005
SEIU ENDORSES JACKSON; VERY BAD NEWS FOR CAMPBELL
Boy, talk about missing the point of your own story. This morning's PD headline was "Campbell wins backing of failed candidates", and you had to read two-thirds of the way through to reach the real news:
The AFL-CIO's phone banking and doorknocking was a huge factor -- many people think it was the factor -- in Campbell's 2001 victory. (Indeed, the absence of labor's field operation from this year's primary was probably a significant factor in the pitiful blue-collar turnout.) SEIU, with a big active membership in the city, East and West, and its own sophisticated phonebanking setup, was a major part of that 2001 AFL-CIO effort.
Now SEIU's people and resources are with Jackson. They've got the technology, they've got the troops, and they've got plenty of time to use them effectively. And in this new post-AFL-CIO world, they have every reason to go all-out to prove they're the baddest players in town.
Especially in light of the tiny primary turnout, an effective union operation calling thousands of blue-collar voters all over town, giving them a push and a clear ten-word rationale to vote for Jackson, ought to be Campbell's worst nightmare. But it's no dream; it's about to happen.
The only way this could get worse for the Mayor would be for the UFCW -- which left the AFL-CIO with SEIU, is even more pissed off about Steelyard Commons, has thousands of its own members in the city, and has serious phone-banking abilities of its own -- to join the Jackson campaign too. Stay tuned.
Boy, talk about missing the point of your own story. This morning's PD headline was "Campbell wins backing of failed candidates", and you had to read two-thirds of the way through to reach the real news:
Jackson was far more interested in winning over the Service Employees International Union, which has 7,500 members in the city. The union endorsed Jackson because the rank and file members believe Campbell has ignored their concerns and possesses the leadership of a "weather vane," union chief Dave Regan said.Back in December, I wrote the following:
He cited Campbell's support of a city retail development that includes a Wal-Mart store and her failure to intercede on the union's behalf during tough contract negotiations with the Cleveland Public Library.
"People feel at best, they have been taken for granted," he said.
SEIU supported Campbell four years ago, as a member of the Cleveland AFL-CIO Federation of Labor, which actively campaigned on her behalf.
SEIU has since left the labor federation, which voted Wednesday night during a two-hour meeting not to endorse a mayoral candidate.
... Regan said the union planned to contact its members by phone and mail and use the union's Columbus and Cleveland phone banks - capable of contacting 200,000 households a day - on Jackson's behalf.
Unless it comes with unprecedented labor and community protection agreements (and I stress the word unprecedented, as in "highly unlikely"), a Wal-Mart in Steelyard Commons will become one of the most important issues in the mayoral election next year and may well cost Jane Campbell a second term.This prediction hasn't seemed very prophetic up to now, largely because the national split in the AFL-CIO this Summer separated the two big anti-Walmart unions (SEIU and UFCW, the United Food and Commercial Workers) from the Cleveland Federation of Labor's political decision-making, effectively removing the central labor body -- and its issues, including Wal-Mart -- from the mayor's race. But SEIU's decision to jump in on Jackson's side may make me look a whole lot smarter.
The AFL-CIO's phone banking and doorknocking was a huge factor -- many people think it was the factor -- in Campbell's 2001 victory. (Indeed, the absence of labor's field operation from this year's primary was probably a significant factor in the pitiful blue-collar turnout.) SEIU, with a big active membership in the city, East and West, and its own sophisticated phonebanking setup, was a major part of that 2001 AFL-CIO effort.
Now SEIU's people and resources are with Jackson. They've got the technology, they've got the troops, and they've got plenty of time to use them effectively. And in this new post-AFL-CIO world, they have every reason to go all-out to prove they're the baddest players in town.
Especially in light of the tiny primary turnout, an effective union operation calling thousands of blue-collar voters all over town, giving them a push and a clear ten-word rationale to vote for Jackson, ought to be Campbell's worst nightmare. But it's no dream; it's about to happen.
The only way this could get worse for the Mayor would be for the UFCW -- which left the AFL-CIO with SEIU, is even more pissed off about Steelyard Commons, has thousands of its own members in the city, and has serious phone-banking abilities of its own -- to join the Jackson campaign too. Stay tuned.
UPSCALING CLEVELAND POLITICS, PART 2
Well, not really. I promised to continue this line of thinking Tuesday so of course it's turned into a bigger deal than I thought, it's Thursday, I'm still digging around in the data and thinking about it, and meanwhile I haven't posted anything else. So... the second installment of "Upscaling" is officially rescheduled until Monday.
Will it be worth waiting for? Who can say?
Well, not really. I promised to continue this line of thinking Tuesday so of course it's turned into a bigger deal than I thought, it's Thursday, I'm still digging around in the data and thinking about it, and meanwhile I haven't posted anything else. So... the second installment of "Upscaling" is officially rescheduled until Monday.
Will it be worth waiting for? Who can say?
10.10.2005
UPSCALING CLEVELAND POLITICS, PART 1
Right Angle Blog catches a piece on the Channel 3 website Friday bragging about their polling on the primary. Well, WKYC's got a right to brag; their election-eve SurveyUSA poll really, truly nailed the final results. But I'm still very curious about the likely voter sample, which was heavily skewed toward voters who've gone to college, compared to the city's adult population as a whole.
Since SurveyUSA's predictions were so accurate, it's reasonable to infer that their sampling was accurate too. Both their samples of self-identified likely primary voters (just before the election and a week earlier) had the same education breakdown: 15% had been to grad school, 17% had four-year college degrees, 28-29% had some college experience, and just 40% had never attended college. As a sample of Cleveland voters this is remarkable, since in the 2000 Census only 35% of college-age city residents had attended college at all, only 15% had degrees of any kind, and two-thirds said they'd never gone past high school.
Has college education become the major factor defining "likely voters" in low-turnout Cleveland elections? Is the educated minority of city residents taking over the role once played by senior citizens -- the role of core voters who will always show up, no matter what?
Well, here's an interesting chart comparing two sets of percentages -- the percentage of people age 25 and older in each ward who've attended college (Census 2000), and the percentage you get by dividing each ward's votes in the very high-turnout November 2004 election by its votes in the very low-turnout election last Tuesday.
With a few striking exceptions, the two percentages follow similar patterns from ward to ward. A higher percentage of college-educated residents tends to coincide with a higher percentage of November voters who also turned out last week.
At this point you may be thinking "Well, du-u-u-h. Of course college-educated voters are more likely to show up at the polls than less educated voters! Isn't that true everywhere?"
That's one reasonable way to look at it. But here's another possibility:
Most people go to the polls only when they have a reason to go -- something or someone they specifically want to vote for, or against. Last November a historically high number of Clevelanders of all education and income levels, more than 170,000, turned out to vote for Kerry against Bush. (Kerry won every single city precinct.) Last Tuesday, only 30% of that number -- apparently the most educated 30% -- found the mayor's race similarly compelling.
Could this be because none of the candidates were making a serious effort to talk to the less educated 70%... the poor and blue-collar majority of the city?
More about this tomorrow.
Right Angle Blog catches a piece on the Channel 3 website Friday bragging about their polling on the primary. Well, WKYC's got a right to brag; their election-eve SurveyUSA poll really, truly nailed the final results. But I'm still very curious about the likely voter sample, which was heavily skewed toward voters who've gone to college, compared to the city's adult population as a whole.
Since SurveyUSA's predictions were so accurate, it's reasonable to infer that their sampling was accurate too. Both their samples of self-identified likely primary voters (just before the election and a week earlier) had the same education breakdown: 15% had been to grad school, 17% had four-year college degrees, 28-29% had some college experience, and just 40% had never attended college. As a sample of Cleveland voters this is remarkable, since in the 2000 Census only 35% of college-age city residents had attended college at all, only 15% had degrees of any kind, and two-thirds said they'd never gone past high school.
Has college education become the major factor defining "likely voters" in low-turnout Cleveland elections? Is the educated minority of city residents taking over the role once played by senior citizens -- the role of core voters who will always show up, no matter what?
Well, here's an interesting chart comparing two sets of percentages -- the percentage of people age 25 and older in each ward who've attended college (Census 2000), and the percentage you get by dividing each ward's votes in the very high-turnout November 2004 election by its votes in the very low-turnout election last Tuesday.
With a few striking exceptions, the two percentages follow similar patterns from ward to ward. A higher percentage of college-educated residents tends to coincide with a higher percentage of November voters who also turned out last week.
At this point you may be thinking "Well, du-u-u-h. Of course college-educated voters are more likely to show up at the polls than less educated voters! Isn't that true everywhere?"
That's one reasonable way to look at it. But here's another possibility:
Most people go to the polls only when they have a reason to go -- something or someone they specifically want to vote for, or against. Last November a historically high number of Clevelanders of all education and income levels, more than 170,000, turned out to vote for Kerry against Bush. (Kerry won every single city precinct.) Last Tuesday, only 30% of that number -- apparently the most educated 30% -- found the mayor's race similarly compelling.
Could this be because none of the candidates were making a serious effort to talk to the less educated 70%... the poor and blue-collar majority of the city?
More about this tomorrow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)