While the politics of the Waxman-Markey bill are fascinating - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has made passage of the bill her highest priority, President Obama and his White House staff pulled out all stops to lobby for the bill, opponents of the bill have called it an economy-killing energy tax, environmental groups have said that it doesn’t go nearly far enough (or fast enough) in curbing carbon emissions and the bill now faces almost impossible odds in the Senate - a singular focus on this legislation ignores the fact that America is on the verge of its second energy crisis in as many years.

Although it is hard to believe that anyone in America could forget the pain caused by $4.00 gasoline and $4.75 diesel last summer, we now know that at least 219 members of the House of Representatives have forgotten.

If there was one lesson to be learned from last year’s energy price spike, it was that the American economy cannot function without affordable, reliable energy.

Unfortunately, litigation-happy environmental groups, the Obama Administration and leaders in Congress seem intent on ensuring that the prices we experienced last summer - the same prices that triggered the economic collapse and led to the current recession - become a permanent fact of life rather than a frightening anomaly.

The playbook that environmental groups are playing from is hardly a secret (one has only to go to their websites where they proudly announce every lawsuit and ask for donations to support their cause): block the development of domestic energy resources, block imports of energy from our allies in Canada and Mexico, block the development of renewable fuels like ethanol and biodiesel, block the development of electricity generation from all sources (including coal, natural gas, wind or biomass generation) and block new transmission development.

This litigation campaign has recently produced a decision by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals to vacate the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) oil and gas leasing program - prohibiting future development of offshore energy resources (including a lease sale in Virginia waters scheduled for 2011). Similar lawsuits have targeted offshore development in the Chukchi Sea of Alaska that holds as much oil and gas as Kuwait and even the development of oil shale in Colorado, Wyoming and Utah where we have more oil on federal lands than in all of Saudi Arabia.

The American people overwhelmingly support increased domestic energy production in order to provide high-paying jobs and lower gasoline and diesel prices.  A recent survey that showed 70 percent of Virginians support offshore oil and gas development. Yet, Congress and the Obama Administration have adopted the agenda of the radical environmental groups and moved us significantly closer to another energy crisis.

Over the last six months, the Obama Administration has suspended the development of a new offshore leasing program, suspended oil and natural gas leases in Utah, announced its opposition to a high-level nuclear waste repository, proposed regulations that will hammer the ethanol and biodiesel industry, suspended an oil shale research and development program and announced its intention to declare that carbon dioxide endangers human health and welfare. These actions will trigger a massive landslide of federal regulations on every human activity that requires the use of energy.

In addition to the Waxman-Markey bill, Congressional leaders have introduced legislation to raise taxes and royalties on oil and natural gas production, prohibit the development of unconventional domestic resources (such as oil shale, oil sands and heavy oil), block imports of oil and petroleum products from Canada and Mexico through the development of a Low Carbon Fuel Standard and block production of natural gas using hydraulic fracturing (potentially cutting domestic production by over 30 percent).

The economics of energy are pretty darn simple - when demand outstrips production (as it did last summer), prices will go up.

The price collapse that we experienced in gasoline and diesel prices last fall was a direct response to demand destruction caused by the economic collapse - not by a sudden increase in supply. In fact, there has been no appreciable supply increase over the last year at all - meaning that when the economy recovers, we can expect both energy demand and prices to rise in direct proportion to economic growth.

Unless Washington gets a major wake-up call from the American people, the restrictions on domestic energy production that the Administration and Congress are putting into place will only exacerbate the supply-demand imbalance and cause prices to climb even higher.

Reducing energy use is good if it reflects getting the same work out of less energy. Just cutting energy use, however, usually means just reducing productivity. The order is a mixture of do less and do better with less.

Beneath the green exterior, however, are some elements that only mean more red ink. For example, any new construction or major renovation requires the buildings to conform to LEED silver or Green Globes two-globe standards, unless an exemption from such standards is granted upon a written finding of special circumstances that make construction to the standards impracticable.

While the Green Globes standards are usually cost-efficient, LEEDs silver standards often are not. One wonders if the special circumstances that allow an exception include budget shortfalls or plain old cost-inefficiency. If cost can’t be fully considered in these decisions, the Order is more for red ink than green government.

The same applies to procurement of diesel fuel containing at least two percent biodiesel fuel or green diesel fuel. By many standards, these fuels have larger carbon footprints than the lower cost diesel, and they cost more. They are red ink fuels with at most a light green patina.

If we were an energy exporting state (think off-shore oil and gas), we could amass sufficient wealth to afford these kind of luxuries.  We aren’t.

Further, if reducing the state’s carbon footprint by this tiny amount were likely to make a meaningful contribution to reaching climate change alarmists’ greenhouse gas reduction goals, arguably these red ink actions might be sensible. Based on a Financial Times report showing China refuses to reduce its carbon footprint, any efforts by Virginia to reduce our footprint have but one effect - we sacrifice state dollars for no environmental gain whatever. For a brief explanation on why this is true, see Virginia and Climate Change.

For a longer report on Virginia and climate change, take a look at the Science and Public Policy Institute’s state level analysis on this issue.  A couple of highlights from that report include:

• Natural year-to-year and decade-to-decade scale variations dominate Virginia’s temperature, precipitation and drought history. Averaged across the state of Virginia, there has been no statistically significant long-term trend in the state’s annual temperature history, nor in precipitation and drought, since 1895.

• If Virginia were to immediately cease all carbon dioxide emission, now and forever, the rate of year-over-year growth in global carbon dioxide emissions (primarily fueled by massive emissions increases in China and India) would completely subsume Virginia’s contribution in less than two months’ time. China alone adds four Virginias-worth of new carbon emissions to its total emissions each and every year.

• Governor Kaine’s call for a partial reduction of Virginia’s greenhouse gas emissions will have absolutely no effect on global or local climate, global temperature or sea level.

While it is the season for watermelon, it is never the time for watermelon environmental politics.

I am not a climatologist, but, like you, I have had to decide whether CO2 is causing global warming.

As an engineer, I have examined the facts and concluded that global warming is, for the most part, a natural phenomenon. What follows are some of the reasons that have led me to such a conclusion. Perhaps this information will help as you make your decision with respect to the need for cutting CO2 emissions by 80 percent, which is what politicians are saying we must do.

1.  Temperatures in 1100 AD were higher than they are today, a time long before the advent of coal fired power plants. The Vikings settled in Greenland and grapes were grown in Scotland.

2.  There was a little ice age extending from the 1500’s until the early 1800’s and the world has been warming naturally since then. Coincidentally, CO2 emissions started to grow with the advent of the industrial revolution in the mid 1800’s. The river Thames froze over with fairs held on the ice, the book Hans Brinker or the Silver Skates described how canals froze in Holland during this period, and a picture of George Washington crossing the Delaware clearly shows extensive ice in the river — ice that is no longer there.

3.  Global temperatures have been steady or declining for the past ten years while CO2 in the atmosphere has continued to rise. If temperatures are declining while CO2 in the atmosphere is rising, it’s an indication there is no cause and effect relationship.

4.  Glaciers at many locations started their retreat long before the advent of the industrial revolution. The Mendenhall glacier in Alaska started to retreat around 1765. The Nigardsbreen and Storbreen glaciers in Norway started their retreats around 1750. The glacier on Mt Kilimanjaro has been retreating in spite of the fact that temperatures at the glacier haven’t risen above freezing. The ice isn’t melting, it’s sublimating; probably due to a lack of moisture caused by a change in the forests below the glacier.

5.  The Pacific Decadal Oscillation has caused temperature changes in Alaska for centuries.

The Aleutian low pressure sits in the northwestern Pacific Ocean. When the low is strong, temperatures in Alaska rise. When it’s weak, temperatures in Alaska fall. The low pressure area shifts from strong to weak, and back again, around every three decades - thus the term decadal oscillation.

6.  The fingerprint for demonstrating that CO2 is the cause of warming is missing.

Computer models used by the UN’s International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) all predict an area of rising temperatures at about 10 kilometers above the equator. Temperature readings taken by satellite and by balloons show no increase in temperature where the computer models predict temperatures should rise. The fingerprint is missing.

7.  NOAA’s network of 1221 stations for measuring temperatures around the United States is producing inaccurate temperature data. A survey of 865 of NOAA’s temperature stations found that 89 percent, or nearly nine out of ten stations produced unreliable data due to improper sitings. Further, 58 percent had errors greater than two degrees Celsius and 11 percent had errors greater than five degrees Celsius.

Nearly all of the items cited here are easily observed or ascertained by anyone interested in finding the facts.

There are many additional facts that require some judgment to evaluate. For example:

• CO2 in the atmosphere rises after temperatures rise - not the other way around.
• CO2 has a decreasing effect on temperatures as the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere increases.

For me, there is overwhelming evidence that global warming is not being caused by CO2 emissions.

With these facts in mind, I believe that enacting legislation (such as the Waxman-Markey Bill) to force an 80 percent reduction in CO2 emissions is both unnecessary and unwise.

Why then, does Virginia still have a transportation problem?

The answer is clear. Transportation is not a high priority for many of Virginia’s political leaders. This will certainly be an issue in this year’s elections.

In its editorial endorsing State Senator Creigh Deeds for the Democrat Party’s nomination for Governor, the Washington Post said “Mr. Deeds has made clear that he would make transportation his first priority.” Curiously, however, a look at the candidate’s campaign website fails to reveal a plan, position or even make mention of transportation. The Post editorial cites Deeds’ past support for a gas tax increase and the unconstitutional Kaine transportation plan, and Deeds himself touts his role in passing the Mark Warner tax increase in 2004 (none of which went to transportation).

This begs the question: can Virginia tackle its transportation needs without raising taxes?

The answer is a resounding yes.  Here are three ways.

1.  Now that Congress has let the ban on offshore oil and gas drilling expire, Virginia can immediately begin to reap the benefits of such development. A study for the General Assembly (House Document 22) finds that $3 billion from offshore royalties can be realized. Delegate Chris Saxman proposed that 50 percent of these royalties be directed to transportation - a proposal opposed by Deeds in the Senate, but endorsed by his Republican opponent, former Delegate and Attorney General Robert McDonnell. A $1.5 billion cash injection into the Commonwealth’s transportation fund is more than 7.5 times the revenue that would have been generated by the Deeds-supported gas tax increase. The Saxman proposal would dedicate one-half of oil and gas royalties, state fees and licenses collected by the state for offshore exploration and development to go to improving Virginia’s transportation infrastructure. The balance of revenues would be used to clean up the Chesapeake Bay and invest in new energy production technologies.

2.  Virginia has been a leader in the use of public-private partnerships for transportation. These innovative financing programs are among the few solutions that have enjoyed bipartisan support in the Commonwealth. But the potential for private investment in the Old Dominion’s infrastructure has not even had its surface scratched. Nationwide, there is $180 billion in available private capital that can be used to build infrastructure projects with little or no federal or state funding. In addition to companies that invest in infrastructure, there are over 30 infrastructure funds ready to invest in the US market with a levered purchasing power of $450 billion. The total equity capital available to invest in US infrastructure is likely to substantially grow in the coming years assuming the US taps into the current pool of equity capital. Funds dedicated to infrastructure have tripled from 2006 to 2008 and the market remains strong in 2009, despite Wall Street’s problems, reports Morgan Stanley.

According to an analysis by Kearsarge Global Advisors:

An important and growing source of private capital for transportation investment in the United States comes from quasi-public, tax-exempt institutions such as public pension funds, university endowments and charitable foundations, which are in essence sub-national sovereign wealth funds of the United States. The total equity capital available to invest in US infrastructure is likely to substantially grow in the coming years assuming the US taps into the current pool of equity capital.

Virginia has one of the most advanced public-private transportation laws in the Nation and is well-positioned to tap these resources.

3.  As previously reported in this column, Virginia lacks a current, accurate inventory of the land it owns. California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has used a land inventory to identify properties the Golden State owns but no longer needs. He is proposing to sell surplus properties to generate as much as $1 billion in revenue. In Virginia, current law requires 50 percent of the revenue from surplus state land sales to be dedicated to the Conservation Resources Fund for further land acquisition. Legislation should be passed to require the Department of General Services to conduct an inventory of all real property owned by the Commonwealth and annually update the catalog. The bill should also provide for the Department to submit an annual report to the Governor and the General Assembly containing the full inventory of real property owned by the Commonwealth and make recommendations regarding property that may be disposed of as surplus. Current law should be amended to dedicate surplus land sales revenue to the Transportation Trust Fund.
Through innovation, Virginia can address its transportation challenges. The Commonwealth’s record on taxes and spending, setting priorities and funding transportation has not been up to the task, but through creative measures such as those aforementioned, can assure an investment in transportation infrastructure to relieve the congested areas of the state without burdening an already stressed economy with higher taxes.

The advent of the internet was certainly a game changer. As  its use and the universe of those using it continues to expand, expectations for how people access information, and how much, are rapidly changing. This goes double for local government. The internet has opened up a new, more vibrant public square where debates about all sorts of local issues happen, with greater frequency and inclusiveness than in previous eras. Local blogs, message boards and listservs have made it easier for citizens to engage in public debates and make their voices heard on questions of local governance. These tools have radically lowered the barrier to becoming involved in public debate and have greatly increased the ability of citizens to hold their government to account. It has also made it far easier for local governments to engage their residents on questions of governance and public spending. Successful government’s have put up one-stop-shops where those interested can access everything they need to become a citizen budget analyst. Everything that the government relies on to make its budget choices can be put online at very minimal expense.

In part because it is now so much easier to provide these levels of transparency, citizens now have a higher expectation for government openness. Across the country citizens have demanded that government checkbooks, contractor databases and general budget data be put online. But some localities have raced ahead of the curve, while many others have lagged far behind. So, in studying the state of online transparency efforts among Virginia’s localities, we come to the following question: What is the minimum level of online transparency a local government should provide?
Currently, Virginia’s localities cover the good, the bad and the ugly in online fiscal transparency. Some, such as Fairfax County, provide an easy to find budget page with full documents. Others, such as Arlington County, go a step further and include context about the budget right on their budget page, making it easier for citizens to find the document they need. Some, like Loudoun County, go one step beyond that and provide an online video archive of all the public meetings related to the budget process. But others, like Powhatan County, merely provide a list of documents, without any context or information about hearings or meeting dates. And then there is Patrick County, which doesn’t provide any discoverable budget information at all, beyond what is mentioned in their Board of Supervisors Minutes.

So what do we see as the baseline standard that all Virginia localities should meet in terms of budget transparency?

• Budget Portal: Counties should have a single, easily accessible website or webpage where all of their budget information is posted. Citizens shouldn’t have to go to five different places on the county website to find the budget information they are looking for. Ideally all the relevant information, items like past years budgets, contractor information, and expenditure data would all be in one place. At a minimum it should be linked to from one place. Just a list of documents isn’t enough either. Arlington has the right idea on its budget page. It provides a little overall context on the budget and makes it easy for citizens to figure out what they are looking for and at.

• Comprehensive Documentation: Approving a budget is a fluid, dynamic process and that should be well represented in the information provided. A county’s budget documents should be posted online from the start of the process on through completion. Updates should be made available for the proposed budget as it goes through markup and again as it reaches final passage. Moreover, the documents themselves should provide data down to the program level, allowing citizens to see how much is being spent on each program or office the county runs. High-level, departmental looks are nice, but for citizens to truly get a handle on how their money is being spent, much greater detail is needed. Finally, the documents should be both searchable and available in easy to access formats, such as Microsoft Excel files, allowing citizens to truly drill down, manipulate data and make comparisons across time and against other localities.

• Expenditure Information: Counties should provide timely and detailed information on expenditures. Just posting a mid-year report isn’t enough. The federal government and many states have already implemented online checkbooks that allow citizens to see everything the government spends money on. Counties need to do so too. Reports should be posted frequently and with a low minimum reporting requirement. Government’s should not be able to hide behind only releasing expenditures over $5,000 every 6 months.

• Contract Information: Government doesn’t do everything it once did. All sorts of functions that used to be governmental are now contracted out to the private sector. Counties need to release that information. Who got contracts from the government and what for? How much do the contracts cost? Citizens have a right to know.

If all of Virginia’s counties and school boards met these standards we would be a much more informed and aware citizenry, but this is just the tip of the iceberg. Simply following through on these measures, while a significant upgrade over the hodge-podge collection of documents that passes for transparency throughout much of the commonwealth, doesn’t take full advantage of power of the internet. There are a lot of additional things that governments can do that enable their citizens to get much more out of online transparency. From video archives to real time data feeds, innovative governments are making themselves more open and their constituents better informed. Next issue we’ll take a look at what the best practices in this new online world look like.

It began January 2, 2008 when four newly elected supervisors held secret meetings, fired the county administrator and took other actions deemed to be illegal and without the knowledge and agreement of the full board. Consequently, a five-month, special grand jury returned 14 misdemeanor indictments against the four supervisors on July 8, 2008. The indictments charged malfeasance, misfeasance and misuse of office in connection with their January 2 meeting. As a result of this, Gloucester County Citizens for Accountable Representation, a group of some 40 citizens, circulated petitions to remove the four supervisors from office. Over 6000 county residents signed the petitions, which were filed with the court in early September. However, all 14 indictments against the supervisors were dismissed with prejudice at the request of another special prosecutor.

The four supervisors then filed a request for their $129,321 legal fees to be paid by the county. In ruling who would pay these costs, substitute judge Westbrook Parker of Suffolk ruled that the 40 citizens who circulated the petitions should pay $2000 each as a penalty, with the amount generated ($80,000) being subtracted from the total owed by the county. During a brief hearing held on November 19, the special prosecutor determined the petitions to be flawed procedurally and substantively: procedurally because they were not signed under penalty of perjury and substantively because they did not narrowly and specifically define the grounds for the supervisors’ removal.

Stunned at Judge Parker’s December 17 ruling, Carl W. Tobias, a University of Richmond law professor said, “This may be brand-new territory.  I don’t think this has ever happened in Virginia.” Robert M. O’Neil, a noted constitutional law professor and former president at the University of Virginia said the ruling could infringe upon the First Amendment: “A court should protect a citizen, plaintiff or lawyer seeking redress. This is a most unusual type of sanction [on these 40 individuals]. I have not seen anything like this.”

Meanwhile, a local drive got underway in Gloucester to help pay these $2,000 fines, the ACLU decided to look into the case and the 40 petitioners hired their own attorney, L. Steven Emert.  He asked that the $2,000 sanctions be vacated, citing evidence that the court had no personal jurisdiction over the 40 citizens. Attorney Emert declined an evidentiary hearing and said he will wait a final order from Judge Parker and, if necessary, appeal his decision. If successful he will take it to the Virginia Supreme Court.

Furthermore, thanks to the diligent efforts of Delegate Harvey Morgan, who represents Gloucester County in the Virginia General Assembly, a bill was introduced (HB 2465) to prevent citizens from being fined when they exercise their  freedom of speech, even if it is to remove  a public official from office. The bill passed unanimously in both the senate and the House and went to the governor for his signature. OOOOPPS, not so fast. The governor wanted to add an amendment making the bill null and void if the petitioners had “malicious intent” in trying to remove government officials from office.

The House of Delegates rejected the Governor’s amendment 57-40, the Senate rejected it 32-7, and sent the bill back to the Governor. He waited until the last minute, but did finally sign it.  The bill becomes law July 1, 2009, though not in time to help the 40 citizens in Gloucester who are still facing $80,000 in fines.

One additional footnote to this story: The case drew the attention of the Thomas Jefferson Center for Protection of Free Expression, which issued a “Muzzle” award to Judge Parker. Muzzles are awarded each year to draw national attention to abridgements of free speech and the press and also to foster an appreciation of the tenets of the First Amendment. Josh Wheeler, Associate Director of the Center, said, “With these Muzzle Awards we hope to remind people we have to always be vigilant in defending our First Amendment rights.” After all is said and done, you have to wonder, “What was Judge Parker thinking?” Fining citizens for circulating a petition!

To see the full list, along with reasons why each candidate was chosen, go to http://www.tjcenter.org/muzzles/muzzle-archive2009.

Representative Boucher (D, 9^th District) has blithely said that Waxman-Markey poses no threat to the coal industry because CCS will be available by 2020.

Originally, all carbon permits were to be auctioned, but Congressman Waxman has had to give free permits to various industries so as to obtain support for the Waxman-Markey Bill from representatives such as Congressman Boucher of Virginia.

Politicians can’t hide behind free permits, which are nothing more than an effort to buy votes. Free permits are actually a bait and switch scheme. The government begins by handing out free permits but switches to auctioning them in the near future. This is what has happened in Europe with its emissions trading scheme.

Capturing CO2 from coal fired power plants in the quantities required is currently not technically feasible, and would substantially increase the cost of electricity. It should be noted that 83 percent of CO2 emissions resulting from the generation of electricity come from burning coal.

Unfortunately, there is no currently proven technology for capturing large quantities of CO2 from existing coal fired power plants. Experiments are underway with regards to pre and post-combustion technologies such as oxy-fuel combustion and Amine and Ammonia Absorption, but nothing on the scale that would be needed for capturing CO2 from existing coal fired power plants.

Even if these technologies eventually materialize, the energy needed for their operation would result in de-rating power plants by around 30 percent. In other words, a new power plant would have to be built to replace the electricity lost when three existing power plants are retrofitted with carbon capture equipment. The new power plant will produce new CO2 emissions (unless it is a nuclear power plant) and further increase the cost of electricity.

Additionally, these CO2 capture technologies require large amounts of space, meaning existing coal fired power plants that lack sufficient space can’t be retrofitted.

It is possible to build new Integrated Gasification and Combined Cycle (IGCC) power plants capable of capturing nearly all of the CO2 from coal, but these power plants can be 80 percent more expensive than modern pulverized coal fired power plants. Only two IGCC plants have been built in the United States and neither was built with the capability of capturing CO2.

Especially important to consider is that without some place to put the CO2 there is no sense capturing it in the first place. And this brings us to what can be described as the myth of sequestering CO2.

It is true that small amounts of CO2 have been sequestered in geologic formations, but this does not prove that CO2 can be sequestered in the huge amounts needed every year for at least the next hundred years. Sequestration has been used in oil fields for enhanced extraction and in two or three installations to get rid of the CO2 that is extracted concurrently with Natural Gas. The Sleipner field in the North Sea sequesters about one million metric tons of CO2 in a saline formation adjacent to the natural gas field.

Our CO2 emissions, just from the generation of electricity, are two thousand times as great as those sequestered at the Sleipner field.

The Department of Energy has developed an atlas depicting geologic formations where it might be possible to sequester CO2 in the United States. The atlas only provides an overview and DOE admits that every site or location selected for sequestration will have to be evaluated to ensure that the geologic formation will actually retain the CO2 and that it won’t leak into adjoining geologic formations where it could cause irreparable harm, such as to fresh water aquifers.

The quantities of liquid CO2 are enormous. MIT noted in its study on Coal, that the amount of liquid CO2 that would have to be transported daily would be about one third larger than all the oil we use. We use around 22 million barrels of oil every day, so we will have to transport about 30 million barrels of liquid CO2 daily from coal fired power plants to where the CO2 is to be sequestered.

TSAugust has developed a map showing where these pipelines would have to be built. The map is available at www.carbonfolly.com. The map shows that at least 11,000 miles of pipelines will have to be built which will entail obtaining rights of way. Obtaining rights of way could easily result in large takings of personal property using eminent domain.

The uncertainties surrounding Sequestration and the huge costs that would be entailed, such as building 11,000 miles of pipelines, make Sequestration by 2020, if ever, no more than a pipe dream.

Here are the hard facts. Every school day some 7,000 students drop out of school. Annually, that adds up to about 1.2 million students who will not graduate from high school with their peers as scheduled. According to the U.S. Department of Education and the Manhattan Institute, the national high school graduation rate is just 69.9 percent. Nationally, the graduation rate for white students was 78 percent, compared with 72 percent for Asian students, 55 percent for African-American students and 53 percent for Hispanic students.

A recent study found that the D.C. graduation rate fell to 48.8 percent in 2006. Comparable numbers for Maryland show a graduation rate of 73.5 percent while Virginia’s sit at 69.2 percent.

Most alarming is the dichotomy between urban and suburban schools. The District is not alone. Seventeen of the nation’s 50 largest cities had high school graduation rates lower than 50 percent. In Baltimore, for example, researchers found that 34.6 percent of city school students graduate, compared to 81.5 percent of the public school students in Baltimore’s suburbs.

Accurate data is hard to come by. Historically, states used different methodologies from determining student attendance. Under President Bush, the U.S. Department of Education last year ordered states to use a standard formula for calculating their dropout/graduation rates by 2013.

The Virginia Department of Education’s data show that Arlington County’s dropout rate for students with limited English proficiency is significantly higher than the statewide average, with 37 percent of these members of Arlington’s class of 2008 dropping out of school before graduation. At Wakefield High School, 42 percent of the students with limited English proficiency dropped out of school before graduating. Half of all Hispanic students in the class of 2008 dropped out of school.

Out of the nation’s 50 largest school districts, Fairfax County Public Schools ranked the fifth highest with a graduation rate of 80.4 percent in 2004. But the county also experienced an eight-point drop in the percentage of students finishing high school from 1995 to 2004, according to a report in The Connection newspapers.

Failure to finish high school not only disadvantages the student, but society pays a price as well. Failing to earn a high school diploma means one will be far more likely to spend one’s life periodically unemployed, on government assistance or cycling in and out of the prison system. Consider the following:

• Dropouts are 3.5 times more likely to be arrested than high school graduates and more than eight times as likely to be incarcerated.

• Nationwide, 68 percent of state prison inmates do not have a high school diploma. There is data showing a 10 percent increase in graduation rates has historically reduced murder and assault rates by approximately 20 percent.

• According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, in February 2009 the national unemployment rate for those without a high school diploma was 4.3 percentage points higher than those who had graduated from high school.

• The U.S. Department of Education reports that students from low-income families are six times more likely to drop out of high school than students from high-income families.

• One study in 2001 found that women who gave birth during their teens completed secondary-level schooling 10 to 12 percent as often and pursued post-secondary education 14 to 29 percent as often as women who waited until age 30.

• The national average annual income for a high school dropout in 2005 was $17,299, compared to $26,933 for a high school graduate, a difference of $9,634. Nationally, high school dropouts were also the only group of workers who saw income levels decline over the last 30 years.

• Children of parents who graduate from high school are themselves far more likely to graduate from high school than are children of parents without a high school diploma.

• High school dropouts are more likely to receive public assistance than graduates and are less likely to have health insurance and a pension or retirement program.

The dropout rate is highest in public schools, followed by private schools. Some studies suggest that Catholic schools experience the lowest non-graduation rate of any school type, usually less than 5 percent.

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich along with activist and onetime presidential candidate Rev. Al Sharpton have jointly called education “the first civil right of the 21st Century.” A high school diploma for every young American, particularly minorities and new immigrants, should become a national priority.

Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob McDonnell says “No.” So does Barack Obama’s Education Secretary Arne Duncan.

On June 4, McDonnell threw down the gauntlet for change, calling for an expansion of successful charter schools, greater choices for parents, increased online learning and a strengthening of turnaround programs for schools that aren’t working.

He’s not alone.

In a press conference four days later, U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan declared that states with inadequate or no charter school laws “will jeopardize their applications under the Race to the Top Fund” - his $5 billion stimulus program. That would likely include Virginia, whose law is so weak the Commonwealth’s application for charter school grants has regularly been rejected.

Duncan made the case for choice when he noted “When parents recognize which schools are failing to educate their children, they will demand more effective options for their kids. They won’t care whether they are charters, non-charters, or some other model….”  No, they won’t.  And they’ll choose the educational choice in which their child thrives.

Both Duncan and McDonnell have their work cut out for them. In McDonnell’s case, he’s fighting an uphill battle against a culture that has tolerated failure and resisted change - even change that leads to success.

For example, while less than 20 percent of low-income students typically go to college, more than 85 percent of low-income students attending the nationally-renowned Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) Charter Schools go on to four-year colleges - same demographics, but very different results. Bringing in KIPP is an obvious solution for low-performing schools, but that requires providing flexibility and freedom so the school leadership can operate outside a top-down bureaucracy.

McDonnell would duplicate Newport News’ successful contract school, the Achievable Dream high school, as an “off the shelf” charter school that could be used throughout the state.  Achievable Dream’s students academically outpace their peers in the traditional public schools and 90 percent of its low-income kids go to college.

But its success equally depends on flexibility and the freedom to innovate - and that’s a “no-no” in the Old Dominion. Ask KIPP’s founder why Virginia isn’t one of the 19 states in which they operate and he notes Virginia “does not have a great charter school law in terms of providing freedom for the schools.”

That’s largely because teachers’ union, school boards association, and school administrators all conspire to prevent allowing charters the flexibility to operate successfully. In fact, the teacher’s union hits the jackpot in scare tactics by claiming such flexibility would lead to segregated all-white schools, ignoring the fact that Barack Obama supports charter school flexibility.

One has to wonder:  Are they saying America’s first black president is on the side of segregation?

McDonnell and Duncan stand together on other K-12 education reforms, as well.  McDonnell has called for an incentive program for teachers and principals who increase student achievement, and is expected to soon release details of a plan for performance pay. Duncan told the Associated Press that “to somehow suggest we should not link student achievement to teacher effectiveness is like suggesting we judge sports teams without looking at the box score.”

And what about the newly-anointed Democratic Party candidate, Creigh Deeds? His website devotes all of four paragraphs to K-12 education issues, with not a word about how to help low-income, at-risk kids. Expected to be endorsed by that same teachers’ union, Deeds is supporting across-the-board salary increases - with the same amount going to an effective teacher as an ineffective one. And he’s voted against giving charter schools the kind of flexibility that makes them effective in teaching at-risk kids.

All of which would appear to pit the McDonnell-Duncan team against the Deeds-union team.

Which should make for an interesting campaign in the months ahead.

Starting in 2006 when Obama and Tom Coburn (R-OK) teamed up to pass legislation creating USASpending.gov, which put the federal government’s checkbook online, there have been efforts around the country to bring government into the internet age, enabling citizens greater access to information detailing how their government operates. States across the country have placed more information online in better, easier to use formats. Every politician, be they right or left, Democrat or Republican, is suddenly spouting the rhetoric of government transparency and paying at least lip service to the ideals of open government.

Here in Virginia our government has made some impressive efforts at opening up its operations. The Commonwealth Data Point service has put the state’s checkbook online and allows citizens to access information on a program by program basis. Virginia Performs allows citizens to check in on how state agencies are doing and see their success at hitting targeted goals. Furthermore, private individuals in Virginia have taken the lead on opening up government information to citizens, with non-profit websites like the Virginia Public Access Project,  Richmond Sunlight and the Virginia Coalition for Open Government repackaging government data and making it far more user-friendly.

Sometimes, though, we fail to even provide enough context for a private group to make good use of the data provided. While Virginia’s Budget Site has an admirable amount of information available, most of it is provided in a difficult to follow and hard to understand format. Similarly, the Legislative Information System pales in comparison to Richmond Sunlight, which provides the same information in an infinitely more useable manner. In other instances, as is the case in many counties and school boards across the Commonwealth, even rudimentary data on government operations via the internet is not provided.

As part of the effort to improve government transparency here in Virginia, the Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy is embarking on a project to examine the current practices of the state’s 135 localities and school boards. The effort will, among other things, seek to define baseline standards and best practices and asses how Virginia localities compare. In conjunction with that, the editors here at Bacon’s Rebellion will, over the next several issues, provide both updates on the status of the study and in-depth looks at transparency programs from around the country. For the first part in the series we thought we would take a brief look at some of the more innovative and interesting work being done here in Virginia and around the country.

In Texas they are taking a three pronged approach as they work to shine a brighter spotlight on how money is spent. The first piece, called Where The Money Goes is a searchable database of state spending that has already paid dividends. “Where the Money Goes provides transparency to taxpayers, and we discovered that our emphasis on transparency made our own operations more transparent to us,” Susan Combs, the state’s Comptroller, said. “We were able to better analyze where and how we were spending money within our agency and where and how we could save.” The second piece, Texas Transparency Check-Up provides a one-stop-shop clearing house for fiscal information at the city, county and school board levels. At each governance level, the entities name is provided along with what spending information is available and for how long (with a link sending you directly to the pertinent page) as well as what is missing. The final piece, the aptly named Single Set of Books, is probably the most interesting and promising. Currently just a planning site this collaborative tool seeks to eliminate conflicting data and provide better tracking and standardization of financial information by integrating the data of various state agencies into a single set of books.

One area where governments around the county have been making major strides is in making available to the public, the data that city, state and federal policy leaders use to form decisions. The District of Colombia has been a particular leader in this area with it’s city-wide data catalog. The catalog, similar to Baltimore’s CitiStat program, allows the public to access hundreds of different government datasets. Everything from arrest records to vacant property filings can be viewed on the DC government website and downloaded by citizens. On the website the data is available in a variety of forms, from simple Microsoft Excel files to Google Maps mash-ups. Also, a number of the datasets are available as .xml files that update in real time, allowing citizens to build programs that use the data in creative ways.

The availability of these datasets allowed the District to launch the Apps for Democracy contest, which provided prizes to the citizens and government agencies that made the most innovative use of the data DC is providing. Winners included the iLive.at program, which allows DC residents and prospective residents to enter their address and access a wealth of information about their neighborhood. By drawing on the datasets DC provided iLive.at provides users with information on the nearest grocery stores, banks, gas stations and other common errand locations to their home, recent crime near their address, demographic data on their neighbors and information on the nearest public service locations, such as fire stations, police stations, hospitals and libraries. All in all the Apps for Democracy contest cost DC $50,000 and returned 47 web, iPhone and Facebook applications with an estimated value to the city of $2.6 million. DC isn’t alone in provide government data to the public, as the federal government has also picked up on the trend and has launched Data.gov, which provides federal government data to citizens.

Virginia isn’t entirely lacking in the ideas department either. LoudounPedia, a wiki run by the Loudoun county library system, has all manner of governmental and community information. More importantly, by choosing a wiki as their format, the library has enabled citizens to take ownership of this resource as members of the community are able to add their own knowledge and experiences. Additionally, the city of Norfolk has created its own YouTube channel a great use of technology to get information out to citizens.

By providing usable data governments allow citizens to improve their quality of life and make government more efficient.