Even more than its ever-increasing expense, the biggest failure of government in Connecticut may be its lack of relevance. News and commentary last week raised several examples.

It was reported that the upcoming session of the General Assembly is expected to see a renewed at-tempt to prohibit "legacy” admissions in public and private institutions of higher education. Such ad-missions involve relatives or friends of big donors and are said to reduce room for students from poor families and minority groups.

But "legacy” admissions are not numerous at public colleges and universities, which long have been heavily recruiting students from poor families and minority groups. "Legacy” admissions are more common in private institutions, but since they can't rely on government funding, why shouldn't they be allowed to favor people who finance them?

In any case enrollment in higher education is lagging and student loan debt explains why. Higher edu-cation is ridiculously overpriced, leaving many of its customers unable to get jobs that can support both a decent lifestyle and loan repayment. Excessive cost is the big problem of higher education, not legacy admissions.

Connecticut's biggest problem in education generally is not higher education but lower education, where per-pupil costs long have been rising even as enrollment and student performance have fallen. Last week it was reported that only 45% of Connecticut lower-education students passed the most recent physical fitness test, the lowest score in 10 years.

Sincere pursuit of justice in education wouldn't have time for "legacy” admissions in college when basic education was doing so poorly. The interest in "legacy” admissions implies that legislators have given up on basic education and need to strike a pose about trivia to look righteous.

In an essay in National Review, the Yankee Institute's Frank Ricci, former president of the firefighters union in New Haven, noted the "cunning tactics” of Connecticut's school superintendents for getting their ever-growing budgets past school boards and taxpayers.

One such tactic resembles what in the federal government is called the "Washington Monument syn-drome” of budgeting, where popular programs — like keeping the Washington Monument open — are threatened with cuts to protect dubious appropriations no one wants to scrutinize.

Superintendents, Ricci writes, propose cutting "seemingly indispensable programs,” like football or foreign languages, prompting outrage in the community. Such proposals distract from areas more de-serving of cuts, like staff increases "unaccompanied by any tangible improvement in academic out-comes.”

The biggest part of municipal school budget increases is always attributed to "fixed costs” -- that is, increases in staff compensation compelled by teacher union contracts. But unfixing the "fixed costs” can't be discussed, since that might call attention to the disconnect between school spending and performance. In turn that might force school board members to acknowledge that the decline in student performance is mostly a matter of the decline in parenting — the failure of many of their own constituents.

Hartford Business Journal editor Greg Bordonaro reviewed the state Transportation Department's Greater Hartford Mobility Study, noting that while its proposals for relocating highways in the city and building two new bridges over the Connecticut River to East Hartford are interesting, the study's rec-ommendations would cost $10 billion or more and there is no plan for getting the money.

Quite apart from the money, where is the necessity? Are Hartford's poverty and dysfunction really matters of insufficient overpasses and underpasses along Interstate 84? Could Hartford really not be improved substantially without moving highways around?

I-84 isn't the cause of division in the city between north and south. People easily go over and under the highway every day. While the city used to be racially divided, Black on the north side, white on the south side, the whole city is now mostly minority and poor and most of its children fatherless.

If there are ever billions more to spend on Hartford, it might be best used to hire parents for the kids. Many already have tutors, social workers, and probation officers. More parents might put the others out of business and save money.

Chris Powell has written about Connecticut government and politics for many years. He can be reached at CPowell@cox.net.