UW-Parkside Threat Was a Hoax

What in the world posseses people to do stuff like this?

SOMERS, Wis.—The Kenosha County Sheriff’s Department said some recent racially motivated threats at University of Wisconsin-Parkside were a hoax.

Authorities said one of the students named on a list of “targeted” black students confessed that she created the list and fliers found in a dormitory. The lists and fliers were found after a report of a rubber band noose found in a residence hall.

Authorities said the student created the list and fliers because she was not happy with the initial response from a resident assistant to the noose.

Magna Carta Goes on Display

Very cool.

WASHINGTON (AP) — A 715-year old copy of Magna Carta will soon return to public view at the National Archives after a conservation effort removed old patches and repaired weak spots in the English declaration of human rights that inspired the United States’ founding documents.

The National Archives unveiled the medieval document Thursday in a specially humidified glass and metal case. It is the only original Magna Carta in the United States and will return to public display Feb. 17.

A $13.5 million gift from philanthropist David Rubenstein funded the conservation, the custom-built case and a new gallery being renovated to host Magna Carta. Rubenstein bought the historic document at auction in 2007 for $21.3 million and sent it to the National Archives on a long-term loan.

Rubenstein, a co-founder of the private equity firm The Carlyle Group, said he sought the document previously owned by Texas billionaire H. Ross Perot because he wanted to keep it from leaving the country.

The camera phone age

My column for the Daily News is online. It’s called, “The camera phone age.”

The High Cost of College

Here’s another story about the high cost of college.

The cost of college has far out-paced inflation over the past five decades, making it harder for students to work their way through college and come out debt-free, or even with manageable debt. Tuition, books and living expenses for an in-state student living on an adequate but moderate budget is estimated at $22,542 at UW-Madison for 2011-12. It was $1,430 in 1960, which equates to $10,867 in 2011 dollars, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

It’s an issue that leaders at both the state and national levels are looking at closely. President Barack Obama unveiled a plan Friday to tie a college’s eligibility for federal aid to the institution’s success at improving affordability. The UW Board of Regents will discuss how to keep costs down at its February meeting.

The reporter tells the tale of a young lady who is struggling to pay for school at UW Madison as the costs continue to go up. It’s an important issue with a lot of layers. How much should taxpayers subsidize college education? If so, how much control should the taxpayers exert over universities? Why are costs going up so much faster than inflation? Etc. There were two things that caught my eye about this particular story. Here’s the first one:

“It is much harder to work your way through college than it was,” Baum said. “That said, there didn’t used to be all this financial aid.”

Hmmmm… that’s interesting. So is the availability of “all this financial aid” driving the price of college? Generally speaking, when one is having to work to pay for something, they are generally more particular about what classes they are willing to pay for. Is the availability of “free” money (and I say “free” including borrowed money which many college students never think about how they will pay it back) resulting in colleges expanding into unwise areas just to soak up those dollars? It wouldn’t be the first time that “free” money created an entire industry designed to get it.

Perhaps that sentence in the story caught my eye because of the second part of the story that got my attention:

Ohlinger is double-majoring in horticulture, and community and environmental sociology, with a certificate in global cultures.

That’s the lady whose story weaves throughout the article. OK… so here we have a young lady who is struggling to attend UW Madison. She admits that she’ll be $40,000 in debt after college and, on her 5th year, she’s easily going to spend $100,000 or more for her education. What’s the ROI on a $100 degree in Horticulture and community and environmental sociology? Might I suggest that if she is struggling to pay for school that she attend a less expensive university? Or get a degree in something that has better job prospects? And if there wasn’t so much “free” money available, would UW Madison even offer a degree in community and environmental sociology?

Class Size Doesn’t Matter

Yup.

We find that traditionally collected input measures — class size, per pupil expenditure, the fraction of teachers with no certification, and the fraction of teachers with an advanced degree — are not correlated with school effectiveness. In stark contrast, we show that an index of five policies suggested by over forty years of qualitative research — frequent teacher feedback, the use of data to guide instruction, high-dosage tutoring, increased instructional time, and high expectations — explains approximately 50 percent of the variation in school effectiveness.

One Liberal Criticizes Boorish Behavior

At least there is one… good for CAFFEINATED POLITICS.

While the bill was contentious, and one that I would argue does not have solid environmental protections, the outbursts and foul language used by protesters in the gallery to make their point was totally out-of-bounds.  The wholy inappropriate cursing at Republicans, draping of a banner, and the pounding on assembly doors made the whole lot of them more buffoons than serious-minded citizens.

Something very unhealthy to democracy has been unleashed at the Capitol over the past year, and unless it is reined in it only has the potential to become more unwieldy and perhaps even dangerous.  What we are witnessing has nothing to do with free speech, but instead is just boorish behavior that makes everyone looks bad.

It is not just the protestors who are to blame, but also legislators who really must conduct themselves in a fashion that underscores the responsibilities they shoulder.

While I am very opposed to Governor Scott Walker and his position on collective bargaining I am also very troubled with the antics of Representative Mark Pocan.  The Madison Democrat put a large anti-Walker banner in his office window at the Statehouse to make a political statement.  There is no way that is acceptable, unless some very tight rules were modified since I worked in the assembly.  I strongly suspect they were not, and this is but one more example of bad form in highly-charged times.

There is a time for frothy debate and hard-nosed political campaigning.  But far more often under the dome there should be level-headed civility and unity when serving in what is be a most impressive building, and (in theory)legislative body.

Living the Good Life

I’m happy for him.

Hembree, 50, is on death row at Central Prison in Raleigh, N.C., but he’s not looking for any pity in the letter he sent to The Gaston Gazette.

“Is the public aware that I am a gentleman of leisure, watching color TV in the A.C., reading, taking naps at will, eating three well balanced hot meals a day,” Hembree asked in the letter. “I’m housed in a building that connects to the new 55 million dollar hospital with round the clock free medical care 24/7.”

He also asks if the public knows that the chances of his “lawful murder” taking place in the next 20 years, if ever, are “very slim.”

Living Wills Restrict Surgeons

Uhhh… isn’t that kind of the point?

High-risk surgeons can get caught in a “Catch-22” when trying to save a life: what if the patient doesn’t want extraordinary measures taken to keep living?

A new study from a UW-Madison surgical professor suggests advance directives, or “living wills,” don’t work in the surgical suite.

Dr. Margaret “Gretchen” Schwarze, assistant professor of surgery at the UW School of Medicine and Public Health, discovered that only 50 percent of surgeons who do high-risk operations discuss advance directives with their patients before surgery.

An even higher percentage, 54 percent, of the surgeons said they wouldn’t operate if a patient had a directive limiting the use of life support in post-operative care, if the surgeon thought it was necessary for the patient’s survival.

The findings were published online first by the publication Annals of Surgery and were in a UW-Madison news release posted Thursday.

An editorial calling the findings “troubling” accompanied the article, which was in the publications’ March issue.

“The goal of surgery is survival,” Schwarze said in the article. “I think what we are seeing is surgeons have a fierce responsibility for bringing their patients out of surgery alive, and they don’t like advance directives because they feel the directives tie their hands behind their backs.”

Old Man Tyler

Wow.

John Tyler was born in 1790. He became the 10th president of the United States in 1841 after William Henry Harrison died in office. Tyler fathered Lyon Gardiner Tyler in 1853, at age 63.  Then, at the age of 71, Lyon Gardiner Tyler fathered Lyon Gardiner Tyler Jr. in 1924 and four years later at age 75, Harrison Ruffin Tyler. Both men are still alive today.

That means just three generations of the Tyler family are spread out over more than 200 years.

Permits to Shoot Problem Wolves Valid Starting Friday

Good.

The DNR plans to send letters out today to about 100 landowners who have had problems with wolves killing livestock telling them that they can obtain permits to hunt wolves on their property. The permits will be valid beginning Friday.

Starting the same day, people also will be allowed to shoot a wolf in the act of attacking personal property without a permit.

Lest you think this is a small issue, take a look at this picture a reader sent me.

That’s one big critter. Here’s some info on it:

NE1/4, SE1/4, Sec 22, T27N-R13E, Shawano Co.
It was found dead in the Hwy G turn lane on Hwy 29 just SE of Tilleda
Adult male wolf hit by car on Friday, Dec 16, 2011 in the afternoon.
Co Hwy Dept personnel reported that it had been seen with 3 other wolves.

Content of School Lunches Doesn’t Influence Childhood Obesity

Great.

Junk food in middle school does not lead to weight gain in children.

A study followed nearly 20,000 students from kindergarten through the eighth grade in 1,000 public and private schools. The researchers examined the children’s weight and found that in the eighth grade, 35.5 percent of kids in schools with junk food were overweight while 34.8 percent of those in schools without it were overweight—a statistically insignificant increase.

In other words, kids with access to junk food at school were no heavier than those without.

Women and Children First!

When the Costa Concordia made her final, literal “bow” to the Italian island of Giglio, passengers made their way to the lifeboats. I read some accounts that it was “every man for himself” and that some were reluctant to let women and children onto the lifeboats first.

Most of us have never been in life-threatening situations and it’s easy to Monday-morning quarterback these kinds of events from the comfort (and dryness) of our couches, but I wonder what people think of the suggestion that women and children should be allowed to go first into the lifeboats.

When we were on our cruise and attended the mandatory muster drill, we were told to stand where the shortest people were in front and the tallest in back. Granted, I don’t see us lining up like that in an emergency, it may have been so that everyone could see the person conducting the drill. When the kids were separated from me and two women shorter than I were place in front of me, the tall man next to me said, “If this were a real emergency, you wouldn’t let that happen, would you?” I responded, “Absolutely not.”

I am pretty certain that in an emergency, I would glue myself to the kids and be sure to stay with them. But I can’t imagine the conversation with Owen, who is a much better person than I, and who I am fairly certain would let women get on board ahead of him simply because that is what you are supposed to do, even if it meant he may die. He’s just that kind of guy.

Others have suggested that times have changed, and the “women and children first” rule no longer applies. There is no reason for a man to give up his life in order for a woman, a stranger, to keep hers, especially when his family is sitting right there in the lifeboat.

What do you think?

The Damaging Impact of Regulations Encouraging Defensive Management

This story is a little convoluted, but it’s extremely revealing. I’m going to cut the story up a little to put into a timeline, because it’s important.

Smiley said her job had became so stressful that she suffered a stroke and was off work for almost three months, beginning July 13, 2009, according to the court filing.

[...]

Smiley, 48, punched out of work for lunch Jan. 28, 2010, but remained at her desk to finish a project assigned by a manager because she did not plan to eat that day, she said.

Smiley, who had passed her 10-year anniversary with the company more than a month before, said another manager told her it was time for her to go to lunch and step away from her desk, but she refused. That manager observed Smiley working on a spreadsheet on her computer, answering the phone and responding to questions by people who approached her desk, according to a filing from the appellate court of Illinois.

[...]

The company’s human resources director then became involved, explaining that hourly non-exempt employees were required to take a 30-minute lunch break, a policy that had been in the company handbook for 10 years, according to the filing. Not following the policy would be a violation of Illinois’ labor laws, the HR director said.

The prominent location of Smiley’s desk, “which was directly at the front door of the office, made this particularly important for her,” according to the human resources director in the court filing. She and Smiley had “many discussions ... over her eating breakfast at her desk,” the filing states

“I knew you couldn’t eat lunch at your desk,” Smiley told ABC News. “I was under the impression that because I was punched out and I could do what I want.”

[...]

Like several states, Illinois has a law that requires employers to provide employees a lunch break. But the law cannot be read to require an employer to fire a worker who refuses to take a break in order to finish her work, said Michael LeRoy, law professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

“Nonetheless, Illinois is an employment-at-will state, which means the employer can fire someone for a good reason, no reason, or a bad reason, as long as it is not discriminatory,” he said.

The story goes on to tell us that she had initially been denied unemployment benefits, but an appelete court overrulled that initial decision. But the behavior here is more interesting to me than the legal aspects.

Here we have an long-term employee. Given her tenure, I think we can presume that she performed her duties adequately and to the satisfaction of management. She suffers a stroke allededly due to stress and was on a medical leave until September (or so) of 2009. Three months later she clocks out and is working through her lunch.

It is against Illinois state law for the company to NOT give her time for lunch and, in an effort to comply with that law, it is against company policy to eat at one’s desk. Presumably the policy is designed to force employees to leave their work area for lunch to make sure they aren’t sneaking in work. Management sees the woman working during her required lunch and fires her for not complying with company policy.

(As an aside, this whole discussion if foreign to me. I work through lunch, breakfast, and dinner all the time. My work schedule is dictated by the needs of the business - not by arbitrary time windows.)

So… put yourself in the mind of management. First, they create a policy the demands that employees leave their desks in order to comply with a state law mandating that employers offer a lunch. They likely, and understanably, interpreted the law as meaning that they would get in a heap of trouble if employees were caught working during lunch. One could argue that if employees made a practice of working at lunch, then even if there is a policy that they must take a lunch, the company culture coerced employees to work anyway. So they write the policy and enforce it in a way to prevent employees from sneaking in work during the mandated lunch time.

Second, this particular employee suffered a medical issue allegedly because of stress from work. Yet she is the one working during lunch and not taking advantage of the break, and stress relief, than a half hour lunch can provide. Not only is she breaking the policy, but she is also contributing to work stress that has led to past medical issues - issues that I’m certain would have to be financially covered by the company due to various regulations (short-term disability, workman’s comp, whatever). Furthermore, if the company is shown to have known that she was working through lunch in violation of the law and allowed it, some jury might find them liable for future stress-related medical issues.

At the end of all that… worried about future lawsuits; worried about complying with state law; worried about her health; and worried about consistent enforcement of company policy; they fired a long-term employee and decided that the cost of recruiting and training an adequate replacement was less that the exposure to risk.

That’s defensive management at its finest. I certainly can’t blame the management of the company for what they did. The laws are set up to make it far too risky for them to just sit down with the employee, explain the policy and the reasoning for it, and keep her on board. It’s a shame, really, that the law too often penalizes those who would “do the right thing.”

Bring Out Yer Dead

This is interesting.

Wisconsin cemetery owners are using radio airwaves to push a bill being circulated in the state Assembly by Whitewater Republican Rep. Evan Wynn, “In Ohio the law mandates that hotel pillows must be white or off white. And here in Wisconsin. Well, it’s actually illegal to jointly own a funeral home and a cemetery. That makes as much sense as forcing you to buy your brat at one concession stand and the bun at a different one. It’s a dumb law and it’s time we bury it.”

Wynn’s bill would repeal a state law that prohibits cemeteries from owning funeral homes and vice versa. Christine Toson Hentges is vice president of Tribute Cemetery Systems in Hartland, “The consumer typically sees cemeteries and funeral homes as one business and by the separation that’s in law right now we’re making them be very inconvenienced by having them go to two different operations.”

I have no idea why this law is even on the books. I can’t imagine any reason why someone can’t own a cemetary and a funeral home. If anything, it seems like it would be more efficient. But the dynamics here are fascinating.

On the one hand, we have the cemetary owners. They want to also own funeral homes because, as well as being a related revenue source, it can funnel revenue into their cemetaries. It makes perfect business sense.

On the other hand, we have funeral home operators who certainly don’t want cemetary owners to enter their market and compete with them.

On the one foot, we have the consumers who would likely benefit from more competition in the funeral home market. Although, it is an odd market in that almost every consumer makes their decision under duress. They are usually in grief, under a time crunch, and have very few ways to compare different providers.

On the other foot, we have a cultural aspect. If cemetary owners enter the funeral home market, will current funeral home owners push cremation to level the playing field? How effective could they be when decisions regarding burial/cremation and funeral arrangements are often driven by larger religious or cultural norms.

Regardless, Wisconsin should repeal the prohibition.

Strange Names

Huh. Who knew?

As nearly every American celebrity has proven, U.S. citizens can lawfully name their offspring just about anything. But in other nations, the government often intervenes. Take New Zealand, where the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages released an official list of prohibited names. Planning to call your daughter “Yeah Detroit”? Always dreamed of twins named “89” and “Sex Fruit?” Steer clear of New Zealand, since those are all illegal. The government will, however, accept boys named “Number 16 Bus Shelter.” At least they’re being logical about it.

In Germany, names must clearly indicate gender. According to Mental Floss, “Matti” is unacceptable for a boy, as it does not imply the child’s sex, but “Legolas” and “Nemo” are fair game. In Iceland, if a name doesn’t already appear on the National Register of Persons, parents must submit an application. A federal committee ultimately rules, addressing grammatical concerns along with potential effects the name will have on the child later on.