Marc Oestreich is a former legislative specialist on education and telecommunications, and coordinator of digital media at The Heartland Institute. He is now a marketing manager at Golden Technologies in Valparaiso, Indiana. Prior to joining Heartland, Marc was a graduate student at Purdue University studying political psychology and education policy. He enjoys defending liberty, writing about education and technology, music, designing websites, and is a fan of the NFL team in Indianapolis. Go Colts!

Posts by author:

Marc Oestreich

The ‘Right to Work’ Hoax

So-called “Right to Work” laws have been reinforcing government tyranny and putting artificial pressures on labor markets for too long. States have felt the pressure to rule against private union agreements–lawful contracts between a shop and a union–since the passage of the Taft-Hartley Act in 1947. The act added regulation on employers, disallowing them from entering into exclusive contracts with employee unions to create a “closed shop.”  The Act made exception to contract for a “union shop” which would allow any worker to be hired, so long as they join the union within 30 days.

While all of this regulation, and the preceding National Labor Relations Act, are unnecessary government interference in the market, one element stands out from the rest. The Taft-Hartley Act contains a clause under which any state government (not local) can also outlaw the “union shop” thereby creating so-called “right to work” states. As each state adds the mandate–often as a result of anti-union political sentiment–surrounding states are pressured to do the same, in order to remain competitive. [click to continue…]

{ 1 comment }

An Attack on Capitalism and the Disadvantaged

Enrollment in for-profit schools—like The Art Institutes and University of Phoenix—has skyrocketed in the past ten years, growing by 21 percent from 2008 to 2009 alone. The increase in popularity and increased competition with traditional tax-funded universities has gotten a lot of attention from politicians quick to call for regulation. But is the extra attention on for profit colleges warranted, or is it an attack on both capitalism and the only higher educational opportunity for the disadvantaged?

Last year, following an error-laden GAO report, Congress and the Obama administration began the witch-hunt by endorsing a series of regulations on student lending practices that apply only to for-profit schools. Among the proposed regulations is one that would assess the likelihood that graduates will be gainfully employed and able to repay debt. While the exact language of this regulation is forthcoming, it carries the very real threat of removing for-profit colleges from loan eligibility; and making college-level programs completely unaffordable to the populations in the most trouble. [click to continue…]

{ 0 comments }

Netflix Tax a Disaster for Web and the Economy

The Consumer Federation of America contends major online content distributors such as Netflix should be taxed in order to funnel more money through the slush-fund boondoggle known as the Universal Service Fund (USF).

This plan—essentially taxing content providers to pay for Internet service provider (ISP) upgrades—is especially absurd coming from a group that is a vocal proponent of “net neutrality,” a policy based on the idea that such charges are “unfair” or “unjust.” Apparently our lean, efficient central government is the only entity capable of fairly determining which companies should pay and which should be subsidized. [click to continue…]

{ 0 comments }

An iPad Subsidy for Teens?

As someone tasked with keeping up on research in two arenas — education policy and tech policy — my job always get a lot easier when the issues merge. Sometimes, though, that merger isn’t so appealing to the rest of humanity — especially the ones that fall into one of the following categories:

  • Pays taxes
  • Has a phone bill

Sound like you? Prepare to be alarmed. [click to continue…]

{ 0 comments }

“AllVid”, CableCARD, and the Trabant

In East Germany the communists produced one automobile which was built to fit the needs of all Germans. The car, the Trabant, was the ugly stepchild of an inherently failing communist economy and the tail end of a 3-wheeled motorcycle project from WWII. Nevertheless 3million Trabis were built, with nary a significant change in technology or styling, over 30 years. The cars were comically underpowered, prone to failure, and incredibly dangerous. The idea that the technical specs didn’t change significantly over 30 years tells us everything we need to know about government-powered innovation.

I like to use the story of the Trabant to illustrate a point: The government and technological innovation are worse than mutually exclusive, they are competing ideas. [click to continue…]

{ 0 comments }

Architect of Broadband Plan Has Second Thoughts

Former FCC member Blair Levin is largely responsible for devising major components of the National Broadband Plan, a set of policies set by the Obama administration in attempt to bring broadband internet access to everyone in America at an affordable price. Just days before his baby is born (some components of the broadband plan are set to start this week), Levin has had a change of heart. Today, according to The Hill, Levin has admitted that the expansion of telephone-based programs like “Link-Up” and “Lifeline” to cover broadband services would be a mistake.

Link-Up and Lifeline are FCC-State partnerships which use Universal Service Fund (USF) money to subsidize low-income people’s telephone bills. Their source of funding, the USF, is paid for by all other consumers of telephone services. A study came out last week which found that for every dollar of incoming funds to the USF, only 41 cents make their way through the endlessly bloated bureaucracy.

Sounds like Levin is right to question the efficiency of his plan. Lets hope he can convince his old co-horts to ditch the effort before its too late.

Read more about it at The Hill’s blog.

{ 0 comments }

Dems: Job Creating Bill Should Take Backseat to Job Creation

Earlier this afternoon Reps Anna Eshoo (D-CA) and Henry Waxman (D-CA) sent a note to Republicans on the Energy and Commerce Committee requesting yet another hearing on net neutrality before the committee votes on rules to repeal the dangerous policy. The Hill’s Sarah Jerome reports:
Waxman and Eshoo suggested the effort distracts from the committee’s jobs agenda. [click to continue…]

{ 0 comments }

Indiana Schools Use Public Grounds For Politics

I suppose its perfectly befitting a school whose mascot is the “Senator” to see ethics and academics take a backseat to personal gain. Washington Township Middle/High School prominently displayed the political message, “No To Vouchers,” on its (undoubtedly high priced) electronic marquee along State Highway 2 last week. The semi-rural school sits just outside of Valparaiso, Indiana where it straddles the border between the very blue northwest and the mostly red remainder of the state. [click to continue…]

{ 0 comments }

Schumer’s Message to Twitter: #ignorance or #evil?

Proposals to regulate the Internet are becoming as formulaic as a Nickelback song these days. [Insert government body] has called on [insert private tech company] to do [thing company already does].

Last year: FCC has called on major ISPs to treat internet content equitably.
Last week: FTC has called on internet browsers to create systems that ensure privacy from behavioral ads.

So I suppose it shouldn’t surprise anyone to hear New York Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer call on websites like Twitter and Facebook to create new privacy features to protect those that access the sites on public wifi connections. [click to continue…]

{ 0 comments }

The War on Unions: When Rhetoric Trumps Logic

Maureen Martin, Bruno Behrend, and a host of other conservative and libertarian thinkers have offered some truly insightful arguments against my post supporting public sector unions. On a vast majority of issues these folks and myself share identical positions. By-and-large, I agree with the ideas they’ve laid out in their posts. I don’t think they’ve been able to make a convincing and cohesive argument against public sector unions. They have, however, made a host of interesting arguments against other problem policies.

There are 2 major complaints about political discussion: (1) Those who assume because I believe X, I inherently belong to whatever group also believes that and inherently subscribe to all other views of that group (not a problem here), and (2) those who fail to address the root cause of a problem (for instance, “We should have teacher merit bonuses in order to create accountability.” Where the clear way to create accountability is to open the market.)

What I’ve decided to do with their posts is to cut-and-paste their main arguments and retort, offering a brief conclusion at the end. [click to continue…]

{ 3 comments }

← Previous Entries