The Obama administration released the 16 finalists in the first round of the RttT competition

STOP THE PRESSES (#2)!!!!  The Obama administration released the 16 finalists in the first round of the RttT competition yesterday and the response from the reform community has been lukewarm because there were too many finalists.  Huh?  Who cares how many finalists there are?  The only thing that matters is how many WINNERS there are – and, here, I do NOT share the view that lots of finalists will mean lots of winners.  I continue to expect 4-6 winners in the first round and maybe 6-8 in the 2^nd round, for a total of approximately 12 winners out of 41 states (and DC) that applied.  This strikes me as a good number.

 

So if there are only going to be 4-6 winners in round 1, why would they have so many finalists?  In my mind, it's political brilliance.  Which state is more likely to enact meaningful reforms in the next two weeks (to try to improve its chances in round 1) or few months (for round 2): California, which didn't make it as a finalist and therefore has little chance of winning even in round 2 with so many other states ahead of it in the race, or New York, which as a finalist is so close to hundreds of millions of dollars that it was taste it?  Obviously, NY (and its 15 peers).  Imagine if the Obama administration had instead picked only 10 finalists: there would have been less criticism – and a whole lot less reform in 6 states…