High tuition by regulation

State and local regulations discourage the construction of new private schools and drive up the costs, thereby driving up tuition, says a new Reason Foundation study.

About Joanne

Comments

  1. Walter E. Wallis says:

    These problems, alas, cover all phases of construction. What initially started out as health and safety regulations whetted the appetite of the powers to spend other people’s money for every whim that might occur to them. The last thing you ever want to do is ask for consideration of your costs or schedule. Some regulators enjoy costing you more money. Some civilians, futless in their own lives, achieve power by opposing the efforts of others.

  2. Richard Brandshaft says:

    All those regulations are the reason natural disasters that kill thousands in the undeveloped world kill dozens here.

    During the cold war, numerous people pointed out — correctly — that border guards in the worker’s paradise were to more stop people from getting out than in.

    Similarly, I don’t see many people who whine about government regulation diserting civilization to live in a unibomber shack in the wilderness. Of course, we wouldn’t hear from them. But there are plenty of whiners left.

  3. “All those regulations are the reason natural disasters that kill thousands in the undeveloped world kill dozens here.”

    Richard, I’ve got to disagree with you on this one. It’s WEALTH that’s responsible for the difference. Third world countries don’t have enough wealth to implement effective disaster mitigations strategies, like houses capable of of standing up to a certain velocity of wind. One can mandate through regulation that those things should exist, but without the wealth to execute it, the regulation is useless.

    That said, Walter is correct that many regulators ignore both the costs and actual effects of their handiwork. Look at the low-flow toilet mandate for a prime example of how this works. It added thousands of dollars to new construction for the first few years it was in effect, and resulted in almost no net savings in water. Why? Because low-flow toilets were an immature technology and it would often take two or three flushes to clear solids from the bowl. The people who put this one into effect only took the intended effect into account. It’s this kind of regulation that I’m strongly against, and I’ll bet I can say the same for Walter.

    While regulations, when very carefully crafted in a process which takes costs, benefits, and side effects into account, can be quite productive and beneficial. However, the way regulations are crafted and administered today, they tend to be more of a problem than a cure.

  4. Mike in Texas says:

    They have to abide by the same rules as everybody else? They need to contact their Republican senator and tell him/her NCLB is not supposed to work that way.

  5. Mike in Texas wrote:

    They need to contact their Republican senator and tell him/her NCLB is not supposed to work that way.

    Now, that would be the Republican senator who got elected despite the best efforts of the state NEA-affiliate, right? How’s that citizen supposed to get through to the senator with the senator’s phone lines clogged with calls from NEA lobbyists who now want to be the senators new, best friend?

    There, now that I’ve got the ritual flogging of Mike out of the way, I can’t get too excited about the linked article. Not that I don’t believe municipal and state enforcement agencies aren’t recruited to help suppress charter school development but that this article makes a lousy case for the wide-spread nature of the practice.

    Complaining about sprinklers is, in my opinion, a lousy example to choose to display the asserted interference. Also, noting that the building is made of steel and steel doesn’t burn is simply silly. It’s not just the building that burns in a fire but the building’s contents. Unless all the contents are highly fire-resistant, it doesn’t matter what the building is made of.

    A sprinkler system is just the best way, all things considered, to keep a fire from achieving flash-over and the, almost inevitable, deaths.