
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>MacIver Institute &#187; mi investigations</title>
	<atom:link href="http://maciverinstitute.com/category/mi-investigations/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://maciverinstitute.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 18:25:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Stimulus Funds Spent on Insurance, Utility Bills</title>
		<link>http://maciverinstitute.com/2010/02/stimulus-funds-spent-on-insurance-heating-bills/</link>
		<comments>http://maciverinstitute.com/2010/02/stimulus-funds-spent-on-insurance-heating-bills/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 01:55:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>MacIver Institute</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mi investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stimulus Watch]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://maciverinstitute.com/?p=778</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Wisconsin School District Justifies Unusual Stimulus Spending &#8211; 
A $416,219.32 payment to WEA Trust for health insurance and $237,861.68 to utility companies from the New Holstein School District raises questions about how school districts across the country were allowed to spend federal stimulus money.
The MacIver Institute has been reviewing how stimulus funds  have been spent [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>Wisconsin School District Justifies Unusual Stimulus Spending &#8211; </em></p>
<p>A $416,219.32 payment to WEA Trust for health insurance and $237,861.68 to utility companies from the New Holstein School District raises questions about how school districts across the country were allowed to spend federal stimulus money.</p>
<p>The MacIver Institute has been reviewing how stimulus funds  have been spent in Wisconsin. The disbursement of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds to WEA Trust, the health insurance and financial services company operated by the state&#8217;s teachers&#8217; union, <strong><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muQZVi7VJ8U" target="_blank">piqued our interests</a></strong> and prompted us to do some further digging.</p>
<p>The only other school district to spend stimulus money for health insurance was Frederic, and that amount was $97,527.  Other districts, including Green Bay and Madison, told the MacIver Institute that stimulus money could not be spent on employee benefits or utility costs.</p>
<p>The general guidance districts followed was stimulus money should “supplement, not supplant”  funding for educational expenses.  In other words, it couldn’t be spent on anything previously paid with other funds.</p>
<p>The logic behind that guidance is that the stimulus money won’t be flowing in forever.  In April 2009, the U.S. Department of Education advised award recipients <em>“The ARRA is expected to be a one-time infusion of substantial new resources.  These funds should be invested in ways that do not result in unsustainable continuing commitments after the funding expires.”</em></p>
<p>The department warned again in September 2009, “<em>Invest the one-time ARRA funds thoughtfully to minimize the ‘funding cliff.’”</em></p>
<p><em><a href="http://maciverinstitute.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/stimulus-watch.jpg"><img class="alignright size-medium wp-image-780" title="stimulus watch" src="http://maciverinstitute.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/stimulus-watch-300x137.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="137" /></a></em></p>
<p>However, despite the Department of Education’s general guidance, districts received stimulus funds in the form of various grants, and not all the grants were held to the same requirements.</p>
<p>“Title 1, Part A” grants were strictly intended to “Improve teaching and learning for students most at risk of failing to meet State academic achievement standards,” according to <a href="http://www.recovery.gov/" target="_blank"><span style="text-decoration: underline;">www.recovery.gov</span></a>.  Those grants were held to the “supplement, not supplant” standard.</p>
<p>However, New Holstein paid for its employee benefits and utilities out of the “State Stabilization Fund-Education Fund,&#8221; monies.  That grant was meant to fill the gap in aid school districts would ordinarily receive from their states.  The US Department of Education stated in June 2009, because school districts “may consider Education Stabilization funds to be available for any activity authorized under the Impact Aid program, the funds may be used to support both current expenditures and other expenses such as capital expenditures.”</p>
<p>In other words, school districts could spend it on practically anything, including benefits and utilities.  In reality, school districts had already spent that money <em>before </em>they even realized it would be coming from the stimulus.</p>
<p>The $416,219.32 New Holstein paid to WEA Trust was for cost incurred during the 2008-2009 school year.  As usual, the district was expecting an aid check from the state in June, reimbursing it for the expense.  However, this year the district&#8217;s aid from the state included $741,608 of stimulus money, which the state used to fill a gap in school aid funding.</p>
<p>It was up to the districts to go back and try to figure out what items that money could be attributed to and how it retroactively contributed to job creation/retention.  Rebecca Hansen, New Holstein’s business manager, decided to attribute it to benefits and utilities.</p>
<p>“I decided to go this route, because this money was money that was guaranteed to us by the State through Equalized Aid payments.&#8221; Hansen said. &#8220;It was not the School District’s choice that our aid payment was supplemented by ARRA funds.  Therefore, I could have put any expenditure that we would normally use state aid money for, which would be things like salaries, benefits, utilities, transportation, etc.  We use both state aid money and money levied by our local municipalities under the revenue limit to pay all of these expenses.  I just chose two of our larger expenses which are expenses that won’t go away to report as part of the survey that was sent.&#8221;</p>
<p>Under the requirements for all stimulus awards, recipients that spent more than $25 thousand in stimulus monies with one vendor had to file separate vendor reports.  That’s what made New Holstein’s expenditures with WEA Trust, New Holstein Utilities, and Wisconsin Public Service stand out.</p>
<p>No other school district in the state spent more than half its stimulus funds on benefits and utilities.  Although it was an unorthodox use of the funds, it was not illegal according to the patchwork of regulations governing the use of ARRA funds.</p>
<p>Senator Alberta Darling (R-River Hills) doesn’t blame New Holstein for how it spent its grants, but points out that was not what the stimulus was intended for.</p>
<p>&#8220;It appears we have here just the latest example of so-called &#8217;stimulus&#8217; funds being spent on something other than creating jobs,&#8221; said Darling. &#8220;Democrats in Wisconsin used this one-time federal funding to bail out their budget and vastly expand government spending.&#8221;</p>
<p>Hansen recognizes using ARRA funds in this way puts the district in danger of facing that “funding cliff,” the US Department of Education warned about.</p>
<p>“It is a constant battle to make ends meet when we are looking at cuts in funding from all areas,&#8221; said Hansen. &#8220;Unfortunately, benefits and utilities are two constants the school district often does not completely control as far as the increases in costs through the years, and we will need to find other ways to make ends meet unfortunately possibly through cutting programs or laying off staff.  It will be an uphill battle in the years to come and the school district is working hard to cut costs without hurting the education of our children.”</p>
<p>That challenge will become all the more apparent after September 30, 2011, when school districts will no longer have stimulus funds to lean on.</p>
<p>&#8220;Their (Democrats&#8217;) irresponsibility has set up state and local governments, school districts and taxpayers for real disasters in the next budget,&#8221; said Darling.</p>
<p style="text-align: right;"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">By Bill Osmulski</span></strong><br />
<em> MacIver News Service</em></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><em><br />
</em></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><em><br />
</em></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><object classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" width="425" height="344" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param name="src" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/acMWsX5sYhg&amp;color1=0xb1b1b1&amp;color2=0xcfcfcf&amp;hl=en_US&amp;feature=player_embedded&amp;fs=1" /><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="344" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/acMWsX5sYhg&amp;color1=0xb1b1b1&amp;color2=0xcfcfcf&amp;hl=en_US&amp;feature=player_embedded&amp;fs=1" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object></p>
<p><a class="a2a_dd addtoany_share_save" href="http://www.addtoany.com/share_save?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fmaciverinstitute.com%2F2010%2F02%2Fstimulus-funds-spent-on-insurance-heating-bills%2F&amp;linkname=Stimulus%20Funds%20Spent%20on%20Insurance%2C%20Utility%20Bills">Share</a> </p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://maciverinstitute.com/2010/02/stimulus-funds-spent-on-insurance-heating-bills/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Miffed Climatologists want UW-Madison to Revoke Global Warming Skeptic&#039;s PhD</title>
		<link>http://maciverinstitute.com/2009/12/miffed-climatologists-want-uw-madison-to-revoke-global-warming-skeptics-phd/</link>
		<comments>http://maciverinstitute.com/2009/12/miffed-climatologists-want-uw-madison-to-revoke-global-warming-skeptics-phd/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 15:22:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>bfraley</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mi investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Storm Clouds]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://maciverinstitute.com.s82611.gridserver.com/?p=102</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Some prominent Climatologists who subscribe to the theory of man-made global warming want the University of Wisconsin to consider revoking Patrick Michaels' Doctorate, according to leaked emails uncovered as part of the brewing 'climategate' scandal.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>
<div><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;"> </span></strong></div>
<div><em>MacIver News Service</em></div>
<div>
<blockquote><p><em>&#8220;Next time I see Pat Michaels at a scientific meeting, I&#8217;ll be tempted to beat the crap out of him.&#8221; -Ben Santer, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory</em></p></blockquote>
<p>Some prominent Climatologists who subscribe to the theory of man-made global warming want the University of Wisconsin to consider revoking Patrick Michaels&#8217; Doctorate, according to leaked emails uncovered as part of the brewing &#8216;climategate&#8217; scandal.</p>
<p><strong>Who is Patrick Michaels?<br />
</strong><br />
Michaels received his PhD in ecological climatology from UW-Madison in 1979 after he earned his A.B. and S.M. degrees in biological sciences and plant ecology from the University of Chicago.  Since then he&#8217;s served as a climatologist for the state of Virginia, a professor of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia, and was a contributing author and reviewer of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).  He&#8217;s currently a senior fellow at the CATO Institute and is a Distinguished Senior Fellow in the School of Public Policy at George Mason University.</p>
<p>According to his official biography, Michaels&#8217; writing has been published in the major scientific journals, including <em>Climate Research, Climatic Change, Geophysical Research Letters, Journal of Climate</em>,<em> Nature</em>, and <em>Science</em>, as well as in newspapers such as <em>The Washington Post, Washington Times, Los Angeles Times, USA Today, Houston Chronicle, </em>and Journal <em>of Commerce.</em> He was an author of the climate &#8220;paper of the year&#8221; awarded by the Association of American Geographers in 2004.</p>
<p>With all these bona fides, why would his peers contemplate waging a campaign to undermine his credibility?</p>
<p>Michaels is also a global warming skeptic.</p>
<p><strong>Questioning Man Made Global Warming<br />
</strong><br />
In September, he wrote an article for National Review accusing Phil Jones, a climatologist at the United Kingdom&#8217;s University of East Anglia, and his colleagues of losing or destroying surface temperature data they used to develop their theories.  You can read the whole article by clicking <strong><a href="http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTBiMTRlMDQxNzEyMmRhZjU3ZmYzODI5MGY4ZWI5OWM=#more">here</a></strong>.</p>
<p>The Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia explained on their website &#8220;Since the 1980s, we have merged the data we have received into existing series or begun new ones, so it is impossible to say if all stations within a particular country or if all of an individual record should be freely available. Data storage availability in the 1980s meant that we were not able to keep the multiple sources for some sites, only the station series after adjustment for homogeneity issues. We, therefore, do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (i.e. quality controlled and homogenized) data.&#8221;</p>
<p>That data was incorporated into a report by the IPCC in the 1990s, which in turn was used by the EPA in drafting its &#8220;<strong><a href="http://epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment/downloads/GHGEndangermentProposal.pdf">Endangerment Findings</a></strong>.&#8221;  The endangerment findings determined that greenhouse gases are at unprecedented levels and are endangering the health and welfare of the public.</p>
<p>Now, Michaels and the Competitive Enterprise Institute are petitioning the EPA to reopen the public comment period, because the data supporting the findings are unreliable.</p>
<p>That allegation did not sit well with Phil Jones and his colleagues.</p>
<p>Ben Santer, a climatologist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, told  Jones in an email on October 9, 2009 &#8220;I&#8217;m really sorry that you have to go through all this stuff, Phil. Next time I see Pat Michaels at a scientific meeting, I&#8217;ll be tempted to beat the crap out of him. Very tempted.&#8221;</p>
<p><strong>Long-running feud<br />
</strong><br />
In an interview with the MacIver Institute on Tuesday, Michaels said that was not the first time Santer had threatened him with bodily harm.  Michaels explained he and Santer have been critical of each other since the mid-1990s.</p>
<p>The feud dates back to at least 1996 when Santer, Jones and others published a paper in the academic journal <em>Nature </em>entitled &#8220;A Search For Human Influences On The Thermal Structure Of The Atmosphere.&#8221;  The authors believed it was supposed to settle the global warming debate once and for all.</p>
<p>Michaels said &#8220;It was a blatant attempt to manipulate public opinion.&#8221; He went on to write an article for <em>Nature</em> about the questionable scientific practices behind Santer and Jones&#8217; work.</p>
<p>It is clear Jones, Santer and others continue to hold a grudge against Michaels. Examples of that grudge can be found in emails leaked from the University of East Anglia.  On October 8, 2009, Santer emailed Rick Piltz, director of Climate Science Watch, questioning Michaels&#8217; own research methods.</p>
<p>Santer wrote &#8220;I&#8217;m sure that Pat Michaels does not have the primary source data used in his Ph.D. thesis. Perhaps one of us should request the datasets used in Michaels&#8217; Ph.D. work, and then ask the University of Wisconsin to withdraw Michaels&#8217; Ph.D. if he fails to produce every dataset and computer program used in the course of his thesis research.&#8221;</p>
<p>Michaels told the MacIver Institute &#8220;The funny thing is I could reproduce every data set.  It&#8217;s not that complicated.&#8221;</p>
<p>As the recently-revealed email conversations continued, Santer defended the reliability of the IPCC study.</p>
<p>&#8220;The integrity and reliability of this story does NOT rest on a single observational dataset, as Michaels and the CEI incorrectly claim,&#8221; Santer emailed.  &#8220;Michaels should and does know better. I can only conclude from his behavior &#8211; and from his participation in this legal action &#8211; that he is being intentionally dishonest.&#8221;</p>
<p>Defending Jones, Santer wrote &#8220;The sad thing here is that Phil Jones is one of the true gentlemen of our field. I have known Phil for most of my scientific career. He is the antithesis of the secretive, &#8216;data destroying&#8217; character the CEI and Michaels are trying to portray to the outside world.&#8221;</p>
<p><strong>The UW Connection<br />
</strong><br />
But the issue of Michaels&#8217; PhD from the University of Wisconsin continued to come up in subsequent emails. The next week, emails from other climatologists continued to speculate about the possibility of revoking Michaels&#8217; Doctorate.</p>
<p>One email asked &#8220;Perhaps the University of Wisconsin ought to open up a public comment period to decide whether Pat Michaels&#8217; PhD needs re-assessing?&#8221;</p>
<p>This week the MacIver Institute filed an open records request with the University of Wisconsin to see if any formal effort against Michaels was undertaken.</p>
<p>In response, John C. Dowling UW&#8217;s Senior University Legal Counsel, wrote, &#8220;According to the current Chair of the Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, there has been no correspondence concerning the Ph.D. granted to Patrick Michael in 1979.&#8221;</p>
<p>The intrigue continues, however. Just today it was reported that Phil Jones has stepped down from his position at the University of East Anglia, pending the results of an investigation of allegations, stemming from the leaked emails, that he overstated case for man-made global warming.</p>
<p>The MacIver Institute will continue to report on developments of this story, including other Wisconsin connections to the controversy.</p>
<div style="text-align: right;"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;"> By Bill Osmulski </span></strong></div>
<div style="text-align: right;"><em>MacIver News Service</em></div>
</div>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://maciverinstitute.com/2009/12/miffed-climatologists-want-uw-madison-to-revoke-global-warming-skeptics-phd/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A UW Connection to Climategate?</title>
		<link>http://maciverinstitute.com/2009/11/a-uw-connection-to-climategate/</link>
		<comments>http://maciverinstitute.com/2009/11/a-uw-connection-to-climategate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:27:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>bfraley</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[mi investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Storm Clouds]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://maciverinstitute.com.s82611.gridserver.com/?p=104</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A brewing controversy surrounding efforts within the environmental science community to manipulate data and intimidate skeptics includes ties to the University of Wisconsin, the MacIver Institute has learned.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>
<div>
<p>A brewing controversy surrounding efforts within the environmental science community to manipulate data and intimidate skeptics includes ties to the University of Wisconsin, the MacIver Institute has learned.</p>
<p>MacIver has discovered that several UW researchers were included in group email conversations that discussed masking data, incorporating false trends into climate research, and blocking efforts to correct that.  Equally alarming, we found that UW grad Pat Michaels, a prominent skeptic of the theory of man-made global warming in the School of Public Policy at George Mason University who is also senior fellow at the Cato Institute, was the target of a campaign of intimidation because of his views.</p>
<p>&#8220;At best UW employees appear to have been privy to efforts to mask or manipulate data,&#8221; said MacIver Institute President Brett Healy. &#8220;Our investigative reporter is in the process of filing open records requests to determine the extent of Wisconsin taxpayer-paid individuals&#8217; participation in such efforts. Furthermore, we&#8217;re looking into whether efforts to undermine Dr. Michaels&#8217; University Doctorate escalated into anything more than petty sniping and speculation.&#8221;</p>
<p>Communications between Ben Santer, a climate scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and Rick Piltz, founder of Climate Science Watch and from Tom Wigley of the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research include speculation of ways in which the University of Wisconsin could reexamine Dr. Michaels&#8217; thesis, for which he received his Doctorate from the UW in 1979.</p>
<p>MacIver&#8217;s investigative reporter, Bill Osmulski, has been analyzing emails from the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England, which were recently made public and have been the subject of international scrutiny. Osmulski is in the process of officially requesting additional documents from the University of Wisconsin, specifically correspondence from individuals who were included in those emails as well as any communications regarding Dr. Michaels&#8217; thesis and Doctorate.</p>
<p>The MacIver Institute will continue to follow this story in the days ahead.</p>
</div>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://maciverinstitute.com/2009/11/a-uw-connection-to-climategate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
