Americans are depending on government to provide more and more services that have traditionally been the sphere of the family or the private sector. The latest trend is the push for universal full-day preschool for all four-year-olds – including children from poor, middle class, and wealthy families.
Pre-kindergarten advocates cite studies that underestimate costs and exaggerate benefits. For example, a study by the Bush School at Texas A&M University claims taxpayers will save at least $3.50 for every dollar spent on preschool. The research clearly shows this claim is misleading and wrong. Any academic benefits from pre-kindergarten fade out by the third grade, so a Cadillac preschool may not equal fewer dropouts.
Examine the results of states with taxpayer funded universal public preschool. Oklahoma and Georgia have both had universal pre-kindergarten for more than a decade and have not seen a rise in fourth grade reading, math, or science scores, as documented in a recent Wall Street Journal article.
If policymakers want to help working families afford preschool, do not turn pre-kindergarten into an entitlement and further grow government. Instead, give families a tax cut and let them use the money to choose the best environment for their child.
The Wall Street Journal reported last week that the number of Americans lacking health insurance fell by 3 percent last year, or 1.3 million people. An encouraging sign? Not at all, as that reduction came entirely from the expansion of government programs. According to the article, the number of people covered by government health insurance increased from 80.3 million in 2006 to 83 million last year.
Double-check my math, but if the number of people covered by government programs increased by 2.7 million, but the number of uninsured decreased by only 1.3 million, that means 1.4 million people dropped their private coverage to get on the government’s tab.
This happens every time government expands health care programs. Fiscal conservatives point out how these expansions cause government to crowd out private insurance and reduce personal responsibility, but our elected officials never listen. Well, here’s your proof: crowd-out is real and it costs taxpayers billions of dollars to pay for people who used to pay their own way.
Credit Texas Senators John Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchison for being two of 10 senators who sent a letter to President George W. Bush, asking him to issue an executive order to conduct an immediate, state-of-the-art seismic survey of oil-and-gas potential in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).
The Wall Street Journal writes, “Current law prohibits any ‘exploration leading to development of ANWR,’ but that prohibition is aimed at exploratory drilling. Seismic testing involves the equivalent of 3D photography and is environmentally benign, so Mr. Bush is well in his rights to issue the order. It's time to get serious about drilling, and a new survey is a useful first step.”
It’s certainly nice to see leadership from the Lone Star State on federal energy policy — much like the leadership from Gov. Perry in seeking a waiver from the economically damaging federal ethanol mandate — as opposed to what is being put forward by the anti-domestic-drilling crowd and the Gang of 10.
At 5:10 p.m., Brooke will be a guest of Dan Patrick (KSEV AM 700 - Houston). And at 6:35 p.m., she will be interviewed by guest host Michael Quinn Sullivan on the "Pratt on Texas" program (KFYO AM 790 - Lubbock).
The reality of high energy prices and our growing dependence on foreign, unstable sources of petroleum and natural gas is apparently causing some environmental advocacy groups (along with many politicians) to bend a bit in their opposition to such common-sense energy solutions as domestic oil drilling, nuclear power, and even coal-fired power plants.
In Santa Barbara, home of the 1969 oil spill that effectively spawned the modern environmental movement, GOO (Get Oil Out!) – a group that formed in response to the 1969 spill – endorsed a plan for drilling off the coast of Santa Barbara.
In Maryland, long-time “green” Gov. Martin O’Malley is now supporting nuclear power expansion in the Free State.
And here in Texas, the Environmental Defense Fund and the Texas Clean Air Cities Coalition dropped their opposition to a proposed 800-megawatt coal-fired power plant in Limestone County, in return for promises from NRG Texas, the utility proposing the plant.
In response to the folly of unrealistic energy policies, the tide may finally be turning – which is a great thing because Americans need relief.
Could California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger be jailed because prison inmates in the Golden State aren’t getting the best health care money can buy? That could happen next month when federal receiver Clark Kelso asks U.S. District Judge Thelton Henderson to hold the governor in contempt for failing to turn over $8 billion that Henderson ordered spent to upgrade prison health care.
The Los Angeles Times reports Kelso wants this big stash of taxpayer cash to renovate prison clinics and build seven health care facilities for 10,000 inmates – even a dental facility to make sure inmates’ teeth are in top form. In a perversion of federalism, Kelso is also demanding a $2 million fine against the state for every day the billions aren’t released.
Texas isn’t immune, as the Texas Department of Criminal Justice’s 2010-11 budget request seeks an extra $181 million to fund inmate health care. Nonetheless, the state’s current medical cost per inmate is half of California’s, even before Judge Henderson’s order.
Perhaps Dallas County has the right idea. It is considering charging misdemeanants in jail $25 per day for room and board, though it forecasts many won’t be able to pay. Prison inmates are even more likely to be broke, indicating the need to expand private sector inmate work programs to defray incarceration costs.
Another solution – don’t imprison as many nonviolent elderly offenders for long periods. TDCJ’s annual report released last week noted that one of the oldest offenders released was James Terry Bray of Midland, who served five years for drug possession and is now a free man at the age of 87. How much taxpayer health care did he consume, and was he really a danger to the public in his mid-80s?
Last week, the TTARA Research Foundation released a study comparing what Texans actually paid in property taxes last year versus what they would have paid had the 79th Texas Legislature not passed the 2006 property tax reforms.
Texans may not know it, but they have actually seen a net savings of $7 billion in school property taxes. By using surplus funds and creating new dedicated revenue sources, the legislature has been able to deliver “meaningful” school property tax relief to taxpayers across the state. So why don’t they know it?
As the report notes, Texans “pay a myriad of property taxes that are typically combined into a single bill.” So even though the legislature may have been successful at limiting the growth of school property taxes, nothing was done to address the growth of city, county, or special district property taxes. Add to that inflated property appraisals, the creation of new taxes, and voter approved tax hikes, and away goes your property tax relief.
Rather than continuing to patch a broken system, the Texas Legislature would be wise to eliminate the property tax altogether in favor of a broad-based consumption tax. That may be the only way that taxpayers would finally see true “tax relief.”
We believe that consumers are in a better position than state regulators to determine what insurance they want to buy and how much they want to pay for it. The price of a cell phone and a year’s service plan today can come close to the cost of a homeowners’ insurance policy, and the contract is certainly no less complex. Yet no one is calling for the Texas Public Utility Commission to regulate cell phone rates and plans – at least, not yet.
But it wouldn’t surprise us if they did, because “consumer advocates” always seem to think that the government can make better decisions for consumers than consumers can make for themselves. That is why they are fighting to keep the Office of Public Insurance Counsel, which serves as a “consumer representative” in the regulatory process.
Our approach is that rather than have a consumer advocate in a convoluted regulatory process, we ought to instead have a consumer friendly regulatory process. Essentially, the regulatory process ought to be designed to let consumers choose their own rates and coverage, with TDI on the lookout in case of fraud or insolvency.
We’ll see who wins this battle – consumers or their self-proclaimed advocates – during the 2009 legislative session.
In some ways, only socialists could love the traditional prison system. Not only is there “free” food and health care for everyone, there is no stratification. Inmates get similar treatment, privileges, and restrictions. For example, inmates earn nothing, go to bed at the same time, and can go to the canteen once a week.
Unlike in the real world, a person’s productivity has no impact on their quality of life. No wonder laziness and riots are commonplace.
Thankfully, Arizona’s four-year-old Get Ready program changes that. As recently highlighted in the Christian Science Monitor, nearly every part of an inmate’s existence -- from the quality of the food they receive to how late they can stay up to trips to the canteen -- are adjusted based on their performance.
All inmates in the program must work; the type of prison job they can apply for depends on whether they have completed their GED. Inmates are empowered to make choices and then bear the consequences, just like in the real world. Due to the uniformity of traditional prisons, Catherine Rohr, who runs the Prison Entrepreneurship Program, says former inmates struggle with ordering from a menu, as they have become automatons behind bars.
Sure enough, the recidivism rate of inmates completing the Get Ready program is 2 percent and inmate violence has plummeted. Moreover, no new funds were used to implement Get Ready.
Texas offers good time credit (except for state jail felons) and bad behavior lands 11,000 inmates in solitary confinement, but more subtle daily adjustments and the availability of earned privileges are lacking compared to the Arizona program. Texas policymakers and corrections officials should be ready to learn from Arizona’s success.
"Lone Star Lesson" is a daily radio commentary on today's most important issues featuring Justin Keener, the Foundation's Vice President of Policy and Communications. The segments air on KVCE 1160 AM (Dallas/Fort Worth) each weekday at 6:18 a.m., 8:15 a.m., 10:20 a.m., 3:15 p.m., and 5:15 p.m.
There are 254 counties in the state of Texas, but today one county, in particular, stands above the rest. Last week, in a tremendous victory for taxpayers, Collin County became the first county government in American history to post detailed spending information online for taxpayers to see. The finances of local government are the next frontier in government transparency.
Today’s evolving view of responsible government has meant that many state governments have posted more detailed spending information online for taxpayers. Local governments have been much slower to follow suit, even though local spending outpaces state spending in many states.
In an attempt to justify explosive budget growth, many local governments have begun to post their adopted budgets online. But these only provide a financial roadmap of local government spending and lack the precision and detail that a check register can provide.
By taking the next step in transparency and posting its check register online, Collin County has shown its commitment to accurate financial reporting and good governance. As citizens, it is our privilege to celebrate such responsible public leadership. As taxpayers, it is our challenge to make sure that everyone else – especially the remaining 253 Texas counties – understands its importance.
"Lone Star Lesson" is a daily radio commentary on today's most important issues featuring Justin Keener, the Foundation's Vice President of Policy and Communications. The segments air on KVCE 1160 AM (Dallas/Fort Worth) each weekday at 6:18 a.m., 8:15 a.m., 10:20 a.m., 3:15 p.m., and 5:15 p.m.
In previous Foundation articles, I have discussed the dependency mindset and big brother mentality that has lead to today’s welfare state. Not only do these go against the principles of limited government and personal responsibility on which our country was founded, but our “welfare state comes with a huge price tag,” as Walter Williams explains in his review of Edgar K. Browning’s new book, Stealing From Each Other.
"Browning entertains a discussion about when inequalities are just or unjust. For example, college graduates earn income higher than high-school dropouts. Some people prefer to work many hours and earn more than others who prefer to work fewer. Students who spend 25 or more hours a week on classroom preparation earn higher grades than students who spend five hours. Most would agree that these inequalities are just.
"There are other sources of inequalities that are unjust, such as when incomes result from fraud, corruption, stealing, exploitation, oppression and the like. Such sources of inequality play an insignificant role in producing income inequality in America. Most economists agree that income is closely related to productivity.
"Much of the justification for the welfare state is to reduce income inequality by making income transfers to the poor."
The result of this policy of redistribution is a loss of productivity; why work to have it given away? Browning estimates that this loss of productivity has reduced GDP by 25 percent, or $4 trillion. Couple that loss with the $620 billion that federal, state and local governments spend on welfare programs – not including social security or uncompensated medical care – and it is apparent that not only does the policy of income redistribution conflict with our founding fathers’ principles…it costs us an arm and a leg!
About 20,000 Texas probationers are revoked to prison every year – half for new offenses, the rest for “technical violations.”
In 2005, we worked with lawmakers to reallocate some probation funding to performance-based grants for departments that use progressive sanctions to reduce technical revocations, resulting in net savings of $55 million from fewer technical revocations. Last year, lawmakers followed our recommendation to avoid new prisons; the alternative package included expanding intermediate sanctions facilities, which lock up technical violators for an average of 90 days, usually as the final sanction before revocation.
Inspiration for the next phase of Texas probation reform could come from across the ocean. I recently attended a presentation on Hawaii's Opportunity Probation with Enforcement (HOPE) program, an innovative probation approach to control revocations and promote compliance featured in The Wall Street Journal.
Participants – either drug possession offenders or property offenders with a drug problem – agree to strict rules, including attending mandatory drug treatment and calling into an automated phone system every morning to find out if they will report to the court for drug testing. If they test positive, they are immediately jailed for several days to a week. If this happens repeatedly, the probationer is revoked. The program has reduced the revocation rate from 31 percent to 9 percent and cut drug use by 91 percent.
While Texas probation departments can use “shock jail,” there is a disincentive to do so because most county jails are full and the county pays for them, while the state picks up the prison costs – about $360 million attributable to technical revocations per biennium. This illustrates the need for further changes in probation funding that would encourage, rather than discourage, initiatives like HOPE in Texas.
The Associated Press reports that the Environmental Protection Agency will announce its decision on Gov. Rick Perry's ethanol waiver request at 12:00 noon Central on Thursday.
Kathleen Hartnett White, Director of the Foundation's Center for Natural Resources, has chronicled the harmful effects of the federal government's misguided food-for-fuel policies. To learn more about this issue, here are the links to her statement on Gov. Rick Perry's ethanol waiver request and her newspaper commentary, "The Folly of Food as Fuel."
Many in the mainstream media have been content to end this “doom-and-gloom” tale here, but to do so does not do proper justice to the actual truth.
Tax revenues have slowed this fiscal year as many Americans have had to tighten their belts and cut back on their spending. However, this is not a practice mirrored by those in government; in fact, government has been on a spending binge for the last several years.
During the second quarter of 2008, state and local government spending rose 7.8 percent as compared to the same time last year, while tax revenue only increased 2.5 percent. In fact, state and local governments are on pace to spend more than $2 trillion in 2008 -- nearly 15 percent of the nation’s GDP.
Driving the surge in states spending has been the creation of new public sector jobs, better compensation packages for government employees, and explosive growth in health care entitlements (read: Medicaid).
It’s time our elected officials learned the art of fiscal discipline. Hard-earned taxpayer dollars do not exist for the purposes of growing the public sector, nor is it very prudent for government to place such a heavy burden on the private sector -- as doing so has the rather unfortunate consequence of hurting their money supply.
As we await the Public Utility Commission of Texas’ final approval of the plan to build 2,376 miles of electric transmission from West Texas to the IH-35 corridor and upper Gulf Coast, let’s take a closer look at its costs.
All reports stop at saying the Electric Reliability Council of Texas estimates the plan to cost $4.93 billion. For transmission lines and substations alone, the cost is estimated at $2,074,915.82 per mile.
However, this is not the end of the costs. ERCOT’s estimates do not include the higher right-of-way costs likely to be incurred in congested areas. Additionally, ERCOT’s costs were estimated using straight-line lengths. Thus, transmission costs were estimated using a best-case-scenario approach. Estimates also exclude non-transmission costs of wind energy development, which will be passed on to ratepayers as well. Finally, ERCOT calculated costs using 2007 dollars. Seen any articles on inflation lately?
When all is said and done, we will wish those lines cost only $4.93 billion.
"Lone Star Lesson" is a daily radio commentary on today's most important issues. Justin Keener, the Foundation's Vice President of Policy and Communications, takes over this week as the host for these segments. The segments air on KVCE 1160 AM (Dallas/Fort Worth) each weekday at 6:18 a.m., 8:15 a.m., 10:20 a.m., 3:15 p.m., and 5:15 p.m.
According to the Chicago Sun-Times, legendary conservative journalist Robert Novak has announced his immediate retirement after being diagnosed with a brain tumor last week. Novak was my guest on the July 24th edition of Texas PolicyCast. We continue our prayers and best wishes for a complete recovery.
Today is the 96th anniversary of Milton Friedman’s birth.
If Dr. Friedman stood for anything, it was freedom. In his book, Free to Choose, Friedman points out that if we are to wisely choose between the “road to serfdom” and “voluntary cooperation between free individuals, “we must … understand the intimate connection between political freedom and economic freedom.”
That connection is too often overlooked today. Economic regulation today—from consumer protection laws to price controls—is based on the ignorance of this principle: “[I]f an exchange between two parties is voluntary, it will not take place unless both believe they will benefit from it. Most economic fallacies derive from the neglect of this simple insight, from the tendency to assume there is a fixed pie, that one party can gain only from the expense of the other.”
Friedman continues, “If we continue down this path, there is no doubt where it will end. … If it is appropriate for the government to protect us from using dangerous bicycles and cap guns, the logic calls for prohibiting still more dangerous activities such as hang-gliding, motorcycling, and skiing.”
Back in 1980, Friedman was optimistic that we would ultimately choose another path: “Fortunately, we are waking up. We are again recognizing the dangers of an over-governed society, coming to understand that good objectives can be perverted by bad means, that reliance on the freedom of people to control their own lives in accordance with their own values is the surest way to achieve the full potential of a great society.”
For supporters of limited government today, 1980 and the Reagan wave of economic freedom sure seem a distant memory, and President Clinton’s proclamation that “the era of big government is over” seems in doubt.
But we must not forget that we still have a choice and should hold fast to Milton Friedman’s optimistic vision for the future.
Today’s Fort Worth Star-Telegram has a story, “Electric rates set to keep falling,” that is of no great surprise to supporters of Texas’ deregulated electricity market. According to the story, “Natural gas prices have swung wildly — and so have electric plans that fluctuate every month.”
The Star-Telegram reports that “the average rate of about 30 different plans from various retail electric providers peaked in June at 17.3 cents per kilowatt-hour. That was up 38 percent from the start of the year.” During the same period, natural gas futures prices rose 65 percent.
Since their peak, futures prices have “plunged about 30 percent to $9.25.” The average rate plan has only dropped four percent during that time, but larger reductions will soon follow. “Deryl Brown, chief executive of Hudson Energy Services Texas, said his 12-month fixed-rate plan for small-business customers is down 21 percent since July 3, when natural gas prices hit a three-year high.”
Of course, over the last couple of years, it was in vogue to blame high electricity prices on deregulation, not on the real causes, such as high natural gas prices. But this story shows the fallacy of that argument.
And so does the fact that electricity prices in Texas today are no higher relative to other states than they were in 2001, before deregulation began.
That is because while electricity prices increase more rapidly in Texas based on market conditions than they do in other states, they also decline more rapidly. Over the next year or so while electricity prices are rising across the country as the higher natural gas prices of 2008 are being built into rate bases, Texas prices will have already adjusted to the new lower price of inputs.
Though we continue to try and find it, we must remember there is no such thing as a free lunch.
Whenever anyone asks me what I do for a living, and I tell them I work for a think tank, I usually get one of three responses: a blank stare, something to the effect of “What does that mean?” or “Cool” (which means, “You lost me at policy, so let’s just move on.”). So let me explain what it is we do.
The Texas Public Policy Foundation is a free-market think tank. If you propose a policy, we don’t care what party you belong to. We care about the details of your policy and its implications for our state and country. Specifically, is your policy a smart choice for society at large, from a cost-benefit perspective?
We research. We write. We speak. We believe in free markets and free people, in competition, in limited government, in private property rights, in individual liberty, and in personal responsibility. These are the principles we champion. It’s really that simple.
We all remember former First Lady Nancy Reagan’s anti-drug campaign, “Just Say No!” But it seems that message really stuck with U.S. Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma. According to the New York Times, he has “holds” on more than 80 bills, stonewalling any further progress on these issues without a full debate or discussion of the bill. Coburn’s tactics have come under fire by his colleagues, who say his shenanigans are unproductive and distract from real issues.
“But Mr. Coburn, as is his wont, begs to differ,” the article explained. “He said the Senate was shirking its duty by failing to give closer review to the hundreds of bills that slide through by unanimous consent. And he said Congress should not be clearing the way for billions of dollars in potential new spending — even on meritorious projects — without making reductions elsewhere. Fearful of the public debt piling up, he said he wanted the opportunity to at least propose those cuts.”
Good for him! Too many bills are passed with little regard for their impact on the budget and instead are approved simply because they seem like the right thing to do. Most often, these bills expand government programs and build on new bureaucracies that are already operating on an inflated budget or a deficit.
Senator Coburn wants to be sure the financial impacts of proposed legislation are given due diligence and are the most valuable use of taxpayers’ dollars. “We ought not be borrowing and expanding the federal government unless we get rid of stuff that is not working,” he said. That should hold true for state governments as well; let’s concentrate on fixing the problems we already have rather than create more of them.
Last week, the Environmental Protection Agency announced it is delaying its decision on Governor Rick Perry’s request for a 50% waiver from the federal ethanol mandate. Gov. Perry sought the waiver on grounds that the mandate is raising feed prices for livestock producers. The EPA was set to announce a decision last week but has delayed its decision until August at the earliest in order to review more than 15,000 public comments and to consult with other federal agencies (e.g., the Departments of Energy and Agriculture).
Corn prices have declined recently but remain well above their pre-federal-mandate levels. Three years ago, when Congress required alternative fuels to be blended with gasoline, corn was just over $2 per bushel. Prices subsequently tripled 2006 levels, and according to the Chicago Board of Trade, have risen 123% during the past year. The reality of post-regulation corn prices needs to be hammered home throughout the EPA’s decision-making process.
Read more on our federal government’s harmful food-for-fuel policies.
"Lone Star Lesson" is a daily radio commentary on today's most important issues. David Guenthner, the Foundation's Director of Media and Government Relations, will be temporarily filling in as the guest host for these segments. The segments air on KVCE 1160 AM (Dallas/Fort Worth) each weekday at 6:18 a.m., 8:15 a.m., 10:20 a.m., 3:15 p.m., and 5:15 p.m.
Slow economic growth, soaring food and fuel costs, and inflationary pressures have combined to push many Americans toward financial hardship. Facing a lean economic outlook, most have begun to cut back on unnecessary expenses and living a more modest lifestyle. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of those in our nation’s capital.
Earlier this month, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated the federal government’s budget deficit at an astonishing $268 billion during the first nine months of fiscal year 2008. This represents an 80 percent increase in future debt obligation for taxpayers when compared to the same period last year.
Initially, the White House Office of Management and Budget had projected the 2008 federal budget deficit at $410 billion. That figure has since been revised upward.
Just as the federal government increased its spending by more than $120 billion, revenues fell slightly. The CBO estimates that revenues decreased by 1 percent, or about $16 billion.
The inability of Congress and the White House to curb their addiction to tax money is appalling. Not only are our nation’s leaders saddling taxpayers and future generations of Americans with an insurmountable debt load, but we’re doing so by selling our future economic, political, and military freedom to foreign nations who will have to be paid back – with interest.
Ronald Reagan once said, “To compare Congress to drunken sailors is an insult to drunken sailors.” Yup, that sounds about right.
"Lone Star Lesson" is a daily radio commentary on today's most important issues. David Guenthner, the Foundation's Director of Media and Government Relations, will be temporarily filling in as the guest host for these segments. The segments air on KVCE 1160 AM (Dallas/Fort Worth) each weekday at 6:18 a.m., 8:15 a.m., 10:20 a.m., 3:15 p.m., and 5:15 p.m.
A recent audit of Baltimore County, Maryland’s books uncovered personal purchases, questionable purchases not supported with receipts, and vendor price agreements not being utilized. According to the Baltimore Examiner, Baltimore County employees purchased personal items like a pair of designer sunglasses and a rain coat totaling $108. Employees could also not produce receipts for transactions totaling $1,200, nor could some file the proper paperwork to take advantage of established, below-market price agreements with vendors. The Director of Public Works promptly apologized for the blemishes.
This is just another example of why government transparency work to curtail the bureaucratic culture from spending without thinking. Websites like the Comptroller's Where the Money Goes and our own Texas Budget Source blaze the trail for accountability in government spending -- one that Maryland should consider following.
A hearty welcome to those of you who are checking us out because of Drew Thornley's quotes in the Associated Press article on Thursday's Public Utility Commission vote on new transmission lines for wind energy.
Here's where you can find the Foundation's research on Texas energy issues.
Here's a link to Drew Thornley's April 24th commentary on wind energy and his May 8th Texas PolicyCast episode on wind energy.
And here's the audio from our March 25th Policy Primer on the role of Texas wind energy.
"Lone Star Lesson" is a daily radio commentary on today's most important issues. David Guenthner, the Foundation's Director of Media and Government Relations, will be temporarily filling in as the guest host for these segments. The segments air on KVCE 1160 AM (Dallas/Fort Worth) each weekday at 6:18 a.m., 8:15 a.m., 10:20 a.m., 3:15 p.m., and 5:15 p.m.
Have you heard of guerrilla gardening? Neither had we, but it’s another example of citizens picking up the slack when they become dissatisfied with the job that the government is doing, or isn’t doing. Increasingly, volunteers are organizing to create and maintain landscaping in public areas that governments have allowed to deteriorate.
The movement, which began in New York City in the late 1970’s, is taking off according to a Christian Science Monitor July 8 report, which spotlights a Los Angeles project. However, guerrilla gardening is also a crime in many jurisdictions. An L.A. bureaucrat said it violates a city ordinance and violators can be fined or jailed. There is a procedure for obtaining city approval, but it involves so much paperwork and time that these flower vigilantes simply take the shovel into their own hands.
The law is similar in Houston. Ordinance 32-10 requires any person who wishes to maintain a natural area to submit an application, which does not appear to be online, and obtain a permit. Moreover, Ordinance 32-33 bans walking, sitting, or standing on any flower bed in a park, which might make it hard to garden. Violations of these provisions are Class C misdemeanors.
In Los Angeles, guerrilla gardeners are undeterred, but they are undercover. The crew goes by aliases, and the organizer says “if authorities come by, there’s no leader” and “nobody knows anybody,” even as they plant evidence of their “crimes.”
Governments may have a legitimate need to keep track of landscaping and maintenance, but a simple online form could accomplish this purpose. Until then, garden at your own risk, include a lawyer in your crew, and ponder whether government could be a little smaller if it made volunteering a little easier.
Encouraging, not outlawing, civic participation – whether it is communal gardening, litter pick-ups, or a neighborhood crime watches – doesn’t just save money; it cultivates stronger communities.
School board members and school administrators need to change their spending habits. As transportation costs explode, causing enormous strain on school district budgets, now is a perfect time to rethink those budgets.
Board members and superintendents should take an inventory of which staff and services are vital to educating students and which ones aren’t. Go through the budget line by line and check expenditures to see if they are necessary and result in higher student achievement.
Our new website, TexasBudgetSource.com, is intended to give parents and taxpayers the tools they need to become additional sets of eyes that help their local school districts with this process. But only one in seven Texas school districts posts its check register online, and the Keller City Limits blog correctly notes that even where such information is made public, it is of limited usefulness when presented in a “static PDF” format that doesn’t allow the user to “sort, categorize and manipulate the data.” Hopefully the existence of TexasBudgetSource.com will provide not only the impetus for additional districts to share their spending information, but the improvement in how such information is presented.
Businesses and taxpayers have to cut spending and trim fat in their budgets. School districts need to follow suit.
I flashed back to the 1980s when I read this over the weekend:
"One of the Senate's senior members — Republican John Warner of Virginia — says it's time to start the conversation about an energy-saving national speed limit to help spare Americans from usurious fuel costs."
The article correctly notes that the old 55-mph speed limit only reduced American gasoline consumption by about 2 percent – barely a drop in the gas tank. Any price savings from a lower speed limit would be more than offset by the 50-150 percent increases that would result from passage of the America’s Climate Security Act…which Warner has co-authored.
If Warner is really concerned about taking a strong stand for American consumers in his final days in office, he should pull down his economy suffocating cap-and-trade legislation and instead help President Bush repeal the ban on off-shore drilling.
And regarding his concerns about public safety, I’ve calculated that a 55-mph speed limit would add about 2-1/2 hours each way when I drive up to see my parents in Kansas. Anyone who thinks that additional time fighting IH-35 traffic – or even driving the vast expanses of straight, flat, empty roads in West Texas – won’t translate into a higher incidence of road rage has never driven IH-35.
Oh. And the flashback? Can't talk about speed limits without this.
In a program that is facing $70 trillion in unfunded liabilities, one would hope that the government would take advantage of every opportunity to cut costs. However, Congress is balking at changes that would save Medicare recipients millions of dollars and taxpayers many times more.
Michael Leavitt, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, explains in an article in The Wall Street Journal that Medicare could save $1 billion a year by doing business with companies that are willing to provide Medicare with medical equipment for lower prices. Right now, Medicare pays $198.40 a month to rent medical equipment that would cost only $600 to buy. This price gouging is a result of pre-arranged contracts with medical equipment providers that have no competition for government business, and as a result, have no incentive to offer lower prices.
Pilot programs that award Medicare contracts based on competitive bidding have resulted in lower prices, but Congress has been reluctant to pass the bill that would apply this same competitive bidding to all Medicare equipment contracts.
With Medicare staring astronomical debt in the face, I don’t think we have the option of turning down any rational opportunity to cut costs.
Each Sunday, the editorial page of the Washington Examiner highlights what it considers the "Brightest Ideas of the Week." This week's #1 was...TexasBudgetSource.com. Thanks for the compliment!
Free trade has become something of a divisive issue over the years. Domestic workers fear the loss of their jobs. Some activists oppose it because of the potential exploitation of inexpensive labor in foreign countries. And there are even those who claim that free trade is turning over control of the world to multinational corporations.
But in Lesson Six of Thinking Economically, Dr. Arthur Laffer makes a good case that all parties benefit from free, or voluntary, trade. He points out:
“People only agree to trade because they expect to benefit from it. This principle is true whether the trade is between Joe from Brooklyn and Mary from Queens, or if the trade is between Abu from India and Claude from France. The discussion gets emotional when different countries are involved, but the economics remain the same; the laws of supply and demand don’t care about geographical boundary lines.”
He later asks us to “imagine a world without trade. Everyone would have to grow his own food, sew his own clothes, build his own house, and (to be really outlandish) give himself open heart surgery. But once we introduce the possibility of trade, people can specialize in occupations.”
Again, this hold true whether the trade is across counties or across countries.
The paper also debunks the argument that trade deficits are automatically bad for a country. I hope you are enjoying these lessons as much as I am.
Would you turn in your neighbor to the police for watering their lawn on the wrong day? By the end of June, some 1,441 Austinites had done just that. That means subjecting the neighbor to a Class C misdemeanor citation which costs several hundred dollars and, if not paid, results in a warrant for the person’s arrest.
Under recently enacted water rules, Austinites can only water their lawns on two designated days each a week and sprinklers may not run between 10 a.m. and 7 p.m. Many Texas cities have such restrictions, even though water conservation should naturally flow from greater scarcity if prices were based on market rates.
On the other hand, last year a 70-year-old Utah woman was arrested and jailed for failing to water her lawn. But it isn’t just watering that attracts the yard police. Earlier this month, Canton, Ohio approved up to 30 days of jail time for residents who fail to mow their lawn. Perhaps these landscaping lawbreakers can mow the jail grounds while they dine at taxpayers’ expense.
Then there is Paul Griffiths, the disabled Bristol, England resident, who last month was convicted and fined more than $1,500 U.S. dollars after his collie allegedly relieved herself on the lawn in front of his home. No neighbor complained but the magistrate’s “dog warden” spotted the act on closed circuit television cameras.
With more than 5,000 city, state, and federal criminal laws applicable to every Texan, our advice is to hit the law books before doing lawn work and remember, when we give government an inch, it will take the yard.
Earlier this week, Talmadge posted the national media hits we got on the launch of TexasBudgetSource.com. But the site has gotten so much publicity here in Texas that it’s taken me until today just to get it compiled and organized.
There was a great story on News 8 Austin and a positive blurb in the Dallas Morning News. Talmadge has done more than a dozen radio interviews this week; we’ve obtained the audio from the Lynn Woolley and Terry Lowry interviews and put those on the site.
But most importantly, we want to thank those of you who have already visited TexasBudgetSource.com. We developed this site to help you understand and follow how your state and local governments spend your tax dollars, so it’s gratifying to see it take root so quickly.
Talmadge Heflin will be appearing on several radio programs this week to discuss the Texas Public Policy Foundation's new initiative on spending transparency.
TUESDAY 10:30 AM -- Talmadge will be on the Lynn Woolley show, which can be heard live on:
* KTEM AM 1400 in Temple/Killeen;
* KWBC AM 1550 in Bryan/College Station;
* KCRS AM 550 in Midland/Odessa;
* KBRA FM 95.9 in Freer; and
* Lynn Woolley's website.
The interview can also be heard on a tape delay at 10:30 p.m. on KVCE AM 1160 in Dallas/Fort Worth.
All of them see that value of TexasBudgetSource.com as a resource to promote government transparency, accountability, and fiscal responsibility. Please go over, check it out, and put it to good use!
At long last, the Environmental Protection Agency is ready to approve the eight-hour ozone State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Dallas-Fort Worth region. Adopted by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) in May 2007, the SIP predicts attainment of the 85-parts-per-billion ozone standard by 2010.
This is an aggressive SIP – with many costly regulatory controls on major and minor point sources of ozone precursors, and hundreds of millions in state funded grants for engine replacement or retrofit. EPA usually has allowed about five years to attain a new standard. With this new standard, EPA imposed an unrealistic time frame of only 2-1/2 years, forcing TCEQ to regulate further stationary sources (e.g., industrial facilities) when the dominant ozone driver in D-FW is mobile source (e.g., cars).
Environmentalist naysayers and opportunistic politicians decry the supposed weakness of the SIP and allege poor air quality in D-FW. Quite the contrary! As measured by multiple monitors, ozone levels are steadily improving in the Metroplex. Against all odds, D-FW actually achieved the previous one-hour standard in 2005. Without any of the onerous controls in this SIP, models show that the area would achieve the eight-hour standard by 2012 as a result of vehicle fleet turnover – new engines produce far less ozone emissions, and a growing economy accelerates the rate of new vehicle purchase. Prosperity and not regulation would most help D-FW air quality.
The federal government has exclusive authority to set engine standards. For the growing urban areas of Texas to attain ever stricter air quality standards, EPA must not merely wield authority over the state to mandate attainment; it must assume its responsibility to address mobile sources.
The environmentalists’ usual strategy to sue EPA for approving the state’s plan will do nothing but delay implementation of the SIP. TCEQ and D-FW local governments should be congratulated for successful completion of this ambitious SIP.
The new Texas chapter of the Institute for Justice (IJ), a public law interest law firm that promotes economic liberty, is representing several computer repair professionals who are challenging a new provision that could force many of them to obtain private investigator licenses. Failure to do so is a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in jail.
At issue is language from HB 2833, a bill last session that the Department of Public Safety Private Security Board said was its “cleanup legislation.” Texas law already required a private investigator’s license if a person “engages in the business of obtaining or furnishing, or accepts employment to obtain or furnish, information related to the identity, habits, business, occupation, knowledge, efficiency, loyalty, movement, location, affiliations, associations, transactions, acts, reputation, or character of a person.” HB 2833 added language specifying that “obtaining or furnishing information includes information obtained or furnished through the review and analysis of, and the investigation into the content of, computer-based data not available to the public.”
IJ says computer repair services have been put on notice by the Board that the new language includes routine services like cleaning out the cache on a customer’s computer, because such data is not available to the public. In order to qualify for a license to do such work, computer repair professionals would have to either obtain a criminal justice degree or complete a three-year apprenticeship under a licensed private investigator.
The Private Security Board is the same agency that expelled thousands of locksmiths, many due to a minor misdemeanor conviction decades ago. Now it has objected to the Sunset Advisory Commission’s recommendation that it be given discretion to review these cases individually, instead of the automatic denials required under another provision the Board sought in HB 2833. Perhaps this litigation will help ensure that capitalism is not criminalized under the guise of protecting public safety.
Wind energy is clean and plentiful—but not cheap, according to a story on CBS 11 in Dallas/Fort Worth.
T. Boone Pickens, who recently purchased 700 wind turbines for installation near Pampa at a cost of $2 billion, was interviewed for the story:
“While it might be cleaner, Pickens says wind power will cost consumers more than the power they're getting right now. ‘If we continue buying foreign oil, we'll be broke in 20 years, so you are going to have to do something immediately. Nobody wants to pay more for anything. I don’t. Energy is going to be more expensive.’”
Mr. Pickens is right about the cost of wind. According to Drew Thornley, building transmission lines to transmit wind energy from West Texas to the rest of the state could cost more than $6.28 billion.
And Mr. Pickens might also be right when he says that energy is going to be more expensive. But he doesn’t have to be.
That’s because government regulations have greatly contributed to the increase in energy prices over the last few years. Restrictions on exploration and drilling have significantly reduced the supply of oil, gasoline and natural gas-driving up prices. Ethanol mandates and subsidies have further driven up the price of energy—and food too! Restrictions on nuclear- and coal-fired generation have reduced electricity supplies and made us more dependent on high cost natural gas. And these costs pale in comparison to the costs of climate change regulation, as detailed by Kathleen Hartnett White.
It needn’t be this way. Reduced regulation, mandates, and subsidies, along with increased exploration of, and generation from, carbon-based fuels, will bring us the clean, less expensive energy we need to maintain a healthy economy and environment.
If Mr. Pickens is right, we have only ourselves to blame.
Last Wednesday, Texas Comptroller Susan Combs released a preliminary report on revenue estimates for the margins tax. In the short lifespan of the state’s new business tax, it has already cost taxpayers $4.2 billion and counting.
Having only received 133,000 payments, the Comptroller’s estimates excluded a portion of the 46,000 businesses who had filed an extension until at least August 15th and for those first time filers the extension can be until November 15. Once these extensions are included in the state’s final revenue estimate due out in November, all Texans will be surprised at just how much government is confiscating from the private sector.
Shocking a majority of small business owners and confusing an even greater number of CPA’s around the state, this insidious tax was originally promoted as a way to deliver much needed property tax relief. As it stands now, the margins tax has not only failed to bring meaningful tax relief to Texas property owners, but is costing many taxpayers a great deal more than their property tax bills ever did.
It is only a matter of time until this tax will be worked into the price of goods and services provided by the businesses paying the tax. Then all Texans will be shouldering the load for these taxes, as we know individuals ultimately pay all taxes. Businesses that cannot raise the prices of their goods and services quickly enough to cover this expense are faced with the prospect of going out of business.
Small businesses and entrepreneurs in the state – the same people responsible for the greatest net job creation – are already challenged with a hard-pressed national economy. Facing the prospect of slower economic growth, Texas government would do well to lighten the heavy burden on businesses.
As cries grow louder and louder about the rising cost of health care , many are looking to the government to help them combat the escalating prices. But from the looks of a report by the Congressional Budget Office, the federal government has its hands full trying to deal with the individuals whose health care they are already responsible for.
According to the report, spending on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, which in 2001 represented about 8 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), will balloon to 14.5 percent in 2030 and will consume 25.7 percent of GDP by 2082. In order for taxes to keep pace with this growth in spending, the CBO says tax rates would have to more than double.
Rather than adding more people to the already bloated government tab, the solution lies in offering a wider variety of affordable health care options so that individuals can find health care services they can afford. That means eliminating regulations that limit the capabilities of nurse practitioners who offer a less expensive alternative to traditional health care providers and making the market more accessible to retail clinics that provide convenient and affordable health care.
Additionally, Texas is in a position to help curtail the federal government’s rampant spending spree. Our state receives $31 billion from the federal government to help fund health and human services in Texas. More than $20 billion of this goes towards Medicaid and CHIP -- programs whose costs are controlled by the state. Texas should seek a federal block grant for Medicaid that would not only give the state more flexibility with the program but would also reign in reckless spending by putting a cap on available funds.
"Lone Star Lesson" is a daily radio commentary on today's most important issues. Foundation Vice President Mary Katherine Stout will be temporarily filling in as the guest host for these segments. The segments air on KVCE 1160 AM (Dallas/Fort Worth) each weekday at 6:18 a.m., 8:15 a.m., 10:20 a.m., 3:15 p.m., and 5:15 p.m.
Today is the third anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s egregious Kelo vs. New London decision, in which a 5-4 majority expanded the ability of governments to use the power of eminent domain to include "economic development." The ruling dealt a tremendous blow to individual property rights and has drawn sharp rebuke from across the philosophical spectrum.
Over the last three years, the Texas Public Policy Foundation has extensively researched the question of how the state can preserve individual property rights in a post-Kelo world. Last month, Bill Peacock and Drew Thornley testified before a House committee on eminent domain and condemnation compensation, respectively. And last fall, Bill Peacock gave a presentation on how eminent domain harms those in need of affordable housing.
Texas has made some progress to protecting Texas landowners from eminent domain abuse, but much more needs to be done.
Last year, our friends at the Tennessee Center for Policy Research obtained the energy bills from Academy Award-winning documentarian Al Gore’s Nashville mansion. They found, among other things, that Gore’s electricity usage in August 2006 was more than twice what the average American household uses in an entire year.
Gore family spokesman Kalee Kreider responded that, “the bottom line is that every family has a different carbon footprint. And what Vice President Gore has asked is for families to calculate that footprint and take steps to reduce and offset it.”
So TCPR just took another look at Nobel laureate Al Gore’s energy bills to see how their “reducing and offsetting” was going. What they found: Even after a “green” retrofit in June 2007 that included new solar panels, a geothermal heating system, lighting upgrades, and an overhaul of the windows and ductwork, Gore’s home energy usage in the 12 months following the renovations was more than 10% higher than the 12 months before.
The average American household consumes 11,040 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity per year. Gore’s Nashville mansion uses an average of 17,768 kWh per month.
And that doesn’t include the carbon footprint from Al Gore’s private jet and Lincoln Town Car transport, his Live Earth concerts, or his 2007 book and arena tours.
“Actions speak louder than words, and Al Gore’s actions prove that he views climate change not as a serious problem, but as a money-making opportunity,” Johnson said. Al Gore is exploiting the public’s concern about the environment to line his pockets and enhance his profile.”
Even after all of his mansion renovations, Al Gore has quite a bit of work to do to get his proverbial carbon house in order.
The Board uses the rankings to measure the seriousness of every offense, which, combined with individual factors such as the number of prior offenses by the inmate, is weighed in making parole decisions.
Using the rankings to guide parole decisions is sensible policy and they, for the most part, are on target. For example, murdering a police officer is rated very high severity while dredging oysters at night is rated low severity. That’s an easy call, especially since dredging oysters at night is normally a misdemeanor but only becomes a felony on multiple convictions. It’s one of no less than 11 Texas criminal offenses relating to oysters.
However, there are some quibbles. For example, carrying a concealed weapon where alcohol is served or where it is prohibited is rated high, the same classification as aggravated kidnapping and rape. Also, applying pesticides that injure vegetation or pollinating insects and anarchism, which may be constitutionally protected, are both rated as medium, while a third DWI is rated as low.
The larger problem though is that there are 2,375 distinct felonies spanning 58 pages. Before enacting new criminal laws, policymakers should make sure that the conduct they are targeting is not already prohibited, because nearly everything is.
Just as city ordinances banning the use of certain foods and ingredients violate the property rights of private restaurant owners, so to do laws requiring eateries to, at their own expense, tell customers how many calories are in their menu items. What a colossal waste of time and money, both for legislatures and city councils and for restaurants.
No legitimate reasoning exists for government’s having the authority to tell a private restaurant how to run their business, whether this means telling them what they can and cannot serve or whether it means telling them they have to disclose to customers calorie counts. This is simply not a proper role of the state. Individuals are free to patronize or not patronize a restaurant for whatever reason(s) they choose. What happened to individual choice and personal responsibility? No one makes forces people to eat high-calorie or high-fat or high-cholesterol items. Rather, they have a choice. This same freedom of choice should extend to restaurants to run their operations however they see fit.
If saner heads prevail, Texas municipalities and state legislators will see the high-cost, property-rights-violating burdens that such calorie-posting laws impose on restaurants and will not join the nanny-state chorus that is creeping ever more deeply into our lives and grabbing ever more of our personal freedoms.
"Lone Star Lesson" is a daily radio commentary on today's most important issues. Foundation Vice President Mary Katherine Stout will be temporarily filling in as the guest host for these segments. The segments air on KVCE 1160 AM (Dallas/Fort Worth) each weekday at 6:18 a.m., 8:15 a.m., 10:20 a.m., 3:15 p.m., and 5:15 p.m.
Two weeks ago, The Wall Street Journal ran two articles praising state efforts to expand health insurance choices. One piece commended recently enacted Florida legislation that created “mandate-light” health insurance policies.
“Insurance companies will be permitted to sell stripped-down, no-frills policies exempted from the more than 50 mandates that Florida otherwise imposes, including for acupuncture and chiropractics. The new plans will be designed to cost as little as $150 a month, or less.”
Similar plans are available in Texas, but each session brings additional mandates resulting in reduced savings.
The other article pointed to New Jersey’s proposed legislation that would allow its citizens to buy health insurance from other states, a policy idea that free market thinkers have advocated for years. And there is no better place to experiment with this policy than New Jersey, which has some of the highest insurance premiums in the country.
“The average national cost for a family health plan is $5,799, according to America's Health Insurance Plans, but in New Jersey that same plan costs $10,398 on average."
If the legislation passes, New Jersey will be the first state to offer this revolutionary alternative, but the Texas Legislature could offer Texans the same opportunity simply by amending the Texas Insurance Code. The Foundation’s recent publication, Expanding the Health Insurance Market, explains the benefits of this arrangement and how the legislature could make this change in Texas.
While Washington, D.C. is flailing in the folly of federal ethanol policy, Texas has stepped forward with much-needed criticism of, and called for relief from, the feds’ misguided food-for-fuel policy.
Not shying away from continuing in the business of picking winners and losers, President Bush recently signed into law the 2007 energy act, mandating the use of 36 billion gallons of ethanol by 2022 – a roughly five-fold increase from the levels at the time of the law’s passage. The result: loss of crop land, food prices greater than would have otherwise been, global food riots, and potentially higher amounts of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere (for those of you who feel oxygen’s counterpart is a bad thing).
Fighting back are Texas’ Gov. Rick Perry and U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson. Citing the disproportionate damage the federal ethanol mandate will inflict on Texas’ economy, Perry recently petitioned the EP
