There is an excellent opinion piece in today’s Albuquerque Journal regarding the way New Mexico’s prevailing wage law is calculated. As we noted in our policy paper on eliminating the budget deficit, the changes made to the law back in 2009, going back to the old way of calculating the prevailing wage law could save taxpayers $60 million annually.

Simply put, New Mexicans should not over-pay for labor on state projects. It is unfair and it takes resources away from other government priorities and will stifle economic growth.

While re-calculating New Mexico’s prevailing wage law as the legislators write would be an important step, the fact is that public works projects should be constructed at market wages that don’t require arbitrary calculations based on local wage rates, etc.

And, while some contractors will not like this, the fact is that strengthening preferences for “local” contractors as some would like to do is only going to increase prices and/or reduce quality. This effort should be abandoned in tough budgetary times as well.

Along with Sen. Sander Rue, I recently sat down with Diane Kinderwater to discuss government transparency, New Mexico’s budget, and several other issues. The show was taped before the session began, but is still relevant. The video is 30 minutes in length and begins at the 1 minute mark.

We in the US are constantly told by the media and self-interested politicians that US manufacturing is on the decline. It is true that jobs have been lost, but what is left unsaid is that American manufacturing is still the most productive in the world and that it produces high-value goods.

Obviously, higher-productivity is good and this belies talk of a sustained decline in US competitiveness and massive job losses due to free trade. That said, if the US wants to remain competitive — whether that be in manufacturing or any other sector of the economy — we need to address our high corporate tax rate and work to improve the quality, specifically in terms of education, of our work force.

Rarely have I seen eye-to-eye with regular opinion piece writer Dr. Jose Armas. On Sunday, I thought that was going to change with this opinion piece. It starts out well enough with discussion of New Mexico’s well-documented education failings, applauds Governor Martinez, and generally talks about the need for change to improve education.

Then he states the following:

Let’s dispel the myth that we’re throwing money at education. New Mexico has been steadily cutting education budgets for decades.

My friend Republican Gov. Dave Cargo told me that his education budget was nearly 55 percent of state spending. Another friend, Democratic Gov. Jerry Apodaca, says his was over 50 percent. That was in the 1970s. Today’s budget has dwindled to 45 percent. And the current proposed cuts threatens to chop education funding to 42 percent.

While I don’t deny that as a percentage of the overall budget, K-12 may be a lower percentage than it used to be, Armas is flat-out wrong in stating that “New Mexico has been cutting education budgets for decades.”

Instead of assertions, let’s look at the Census data. Starting in 1992, when New Mexico spent $3,835 annually per-pupil (according to Table 16).

According to the handy-dandy inflation calculator from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. What would we be spending today if per-pupil expenditures rose at the rate of inflation? According to the BLS, it would be $6,139.83.

What is actually being spent per-pupil? According to page xiii of this document from the Census Bureau, back in 2008, New Mexico was spending $9,068. In other words, per-pupil K-12 spending in New Mexico is more than a third higher IN REAL TERMS than it was back in 1992. That is hardly the picture Armas draws.

The fact is that New Mexico’s schools need dramatic reform, not more money.

RGF released its pig book recently (available here). To celebrate the occasion, we took “Porky” around to some of the most wasteful projects in the Albuquerque area.

There are short videos of “Porky” taking a few swings a taxpayer-subsidized driving range, hanging out at Rio Grande Nature Center State Park, riding the Rail Runner, and jogging on the new stimulus-funded bike bridge over the Rio Grande where he even got to hop in a big rig and honk the horn.

I talked with Mike Jaxson of KSVP radio in Artesia this week about the Environmental Improvement Board court decision and our 2011 New Mexico Piglet Book. Tune in to the 10 minute interview here.

I met Hanna Skandera recently, the new head of New Mexico’s Public Education Department. She is a real go-getter and a fresh face that brings needed energy and new thinking to the state’s education system. We are especially pleased because Skandera is going to be promoting an education reform model that has actually worked.

Skandera recently had an opinion piece in the Albuquerque Journal which outlined some of her reform ideas and her plans to implement them. Skandera is going to be battling an entrenched, unionized, education establishment and she needs your help. If you support education reform that works, now is the time to communicate your preferences to your elected legislators in Santa Fe.

Some in Santa Fe have conflated the state’s film subsidies with the elimination of a single tax that would attract a Union Pacific rail yard to Santa Teresa. Quite simply, this is an absurd comparison.

As I wrote for NMPolitics.net, the Union Pacific deal is eminently sensible, permanent, and will create jobs and economic prosperity for many years to come.

Too often, simple principles are lost in the clutter of misleading arguments and confusing language. Economics is prone to such problems in large part because it is not a science. There is no control group because we are living it.

Anyway, I discuss a few of these ideas and apply them to some hot-button issues in a recent Albuquerque Journal article.

The Rio Grande Foundation, along with the Washington-based Citizens Against Government Waste, has released its latest “Piglet Book” to expose wasteful government spending in New Mexico.

Examples include everything from peanut subsidies in Portales to wasteful job training subsidies and interest-free film loans that are still outstanding. All of these and much, much more are contained in the Booklet which is available online here.

Thanks to the Concerned Citizens for APS Reform, the Rio Grande Foundation has received this voter guide to the APS election. The questions asked are relevant to education reform and the need to transform APS into a responsive, successful organization that encourages transparency and oversight from taxpayers.

Take a look at the guide and be sure to get out and vote.

Trip Jennings of the New Mexican recently interviewed several legislators and Gov. Martinez about film subsidies and other potential tax hikes. I thought the article was reasonable, but clearly showed the ignorance of basic economics and tax policies of certain legislators, particularly Brian Egolf and Michael Sanchez.

Both of these legislators attempt to conflate tax collections foregone (basically, any business tax incentive for any other industry besides film) and direct expenditures. The difference is that Union Pacific, for example, if they build a rail yard in Santa Teresa, may receive some tax breaks. But that does not directly cost the state or taxpayers anything (in fact, they’ll pay other taxes). The film industry, on the other hand, gets checks from the state for far more than they ever pay in taxes.

How do I know this? Even if we assume that the industry’s numbers are correct and that it brings in $500 million in economic activity, the industry costs taxpayers $70 million. With a state GRT rate of 5% and personal income rate of 4.9%, that $500 million in economic activity earns at most $25 million in tax revenue….so we’re giving away $70 million to get $25 million? That’s apparently what Egolf and Sanchez (and others) want.

The oil and gas industry, Union Pacific, grocery purchasers, and others who receive breaks against taxes that would otherwise be collected are not costing the taxpayers of New Mexico a cent, so policymakers should stop playing word games.

Seeking input from New Mexico government officials and agencies on how to do things more efficiently is like asking a cow for the best green chile cheesburger recipe. Despite the fact that New Mexico has more cabinet agencies than the federal government.

Yet, when Sen. Tim Eichenberg, chairman of the legislative Government Restructuring Task Force, tried to communicate with the bureaucracy to find ways to do things better or in less costly ways, he was stymied. Said Eichenberg, “Instead of suggestions (from state officials and employees), we heard impassioned defenses of the status quo.”

Of course dozens of boards could be eliminated and cabinet officials could be merged. My idea for Martinez: “Tell each of the top-level bureaucrats to find at least 5% savings at their agency or they lose their jobs.” Of course, many of these bureaucrats have the protections of civil service jobs, but many of them do not. It is high time that government bureaucrats realize they serve the taxpayers of this state, not themselves.

I could not help but laugh when I read this article in the Albuquerque Journal that included a lot of bellyaching from APS board members over Gov. Martinez’s “State of the State” speech and reform proposals.

Robert Lucero called the Governor “disingenuous” for attacking the APS bureaucracy. Well, if APS wants to show that they DO NOT have a bloated bureaucracy, why don’t they start by publishing salary information for all district employees (including teachers) on the Internet? While they’re at it, they could add vendor transactions as well. We requested this information in an electronic format for our “newmexicospending.com” site and APS basically told us to “go to $%*&” (even though this is supposed to be public information).

So, without the public having adequate information (thanks to APS), the situation is reduced to a “he said, she said” situation. Of course, the Governor has been in office for a few weeks, so she is not the problem. The problem is APS which has failed year after year.

Sen. Fishcmann has introduced legislation demanding that electronic records be made available upon request, but ultimately we need to have school district data added to the Sunshine Portal.

New Mexico Sen. Dede Feldman is a leftist Democrat. She wants government to control all aspects of American health care. She’s settled for the corporatist ObamaCare plan that passed in Washington last year. Recently, in the Albuquerque Journal, Feldman made her pitch for why the Martinez Administration should not opt out or work to abolish the law.

Her argument can be summarized in one word “money.” Specifically, sprinkled throughout the bill are federal funds for the states to help align themselves with the federal law and to supposedly expand coverage. Of course, Feldman doesn’t really mention where all this money is coming from. The answer to that is simple: 1) taxpayers in New Mexico and other states 2) China;

What is needed is not more funding of state programs. Instead, the fundamental payment structure of health care must be addressed. Rather than the individual mandate which locks us into the 3rd party payer system, Congress should consider either abolishing businesses’ tax advantages for health care or extending those to individuals as well. Putting health care decisions back in the hands of individuals (and limiting insurance companies to actual insurance) is the only way to cut costs and improve quality at the same time.

The House of Representatives did a good thing by passing a repeal yesterday, but they need to come up with an alternative plan of their own that relies on free market principles and devolves policymaking to the states. In the meantime, Obama, Feldman, and others will rearrange the deck chairs on the sinking Titanic of ObamaCare.

With the House of Representatives poised to pass a repeal of health care (the effort is likely to die in the Senate, but it is still a worthy exercise), Dr. Deane Waldman explains in this new article where the much-discussed “death panels” really are to be found in the new health care law.

Yesterday, I was in Santa Fe for the start of the legislative session and the Tea Party rally. Overall, the rally was very good and I commend them for bringing people from all over the state to make their voices heard before the Legislature and Governor.

Among the speakers at the rally was former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson. Among other things like fiscal restraint etc., he talked about his position on legalizing drugs. This drew some derisive hisses and catcalls from the crowd that I think were unfortunate. And, while 95% of the crowd either cheered or were at least respectful, some in the crowd made for an awkward scene. This is not the first time Johnson has received a mixed reaction for his legalization message from Tea Partiers.

I just don’t understand this. Gary Johnson — with the possible exception of Ron Paul — is the single most fiscally-conservative candidate likely to run for president in 2012. He SHOULD be a tea party rock star regardless of what you think about the drug issue.

More importantly. Under the Tea Party’s professed (and my actual) reading of the Constitution, the drug war as is now being fought by the Federal Government is blatantly unconstitutional. This is because drugs are not mentioned in the document, so this is rightfully the province of the states. Also, there is the precedent of alcohol prohibition which required an amendment to the Constitution. Shouldn’t the same be done if the feds are going to ban all drugs?

Lastly, and perhaps most ironically, the issues of marijuana and ObamaCare are inextricably linked now due to the Raich case which was decided a few years ago by the Supreme Court. When the anti-ObamaCare lawsuits hit the Court, one of the biggest arrows in the Administration’s quiver is bound to be this case which clearly gives the federal government control of what medicine Americans have access to.

Anyway, regardless of your views on drug prohibition, next time Gary Johnson speaks, don’t give him a hard time.

No surprise that, despite poor results, the US ranks near the top of this survey. So much for more money being the answer to education woes in the US or in New Mexico. Thanks to the folks at the Mercatus Center for this useful information.

There are lots of reasons to love freedom and liberty. One good one that is not talked about enough is that, contrary to popular belief, markets lend themselves to helping our fellow humans. Don’t believe me?

Check out this story and contrast the “compassion and understanding” of the nameless, faceless bureaucrats at the TSA with the courageous and loving actions of the pilot of the Southwest Airlines jet. I’ve always enjoyed flying Southwest and do so now more than ever with a little one and the need to check luggage on most trips.

Thank you to Southwest Airlines for showing the world that having the freedom to be compassionate is what freedom is all about!

Surprise, surprise! The heavily-subsidized RailRunner continues to bleed riders. As Kate Nash at The New Mexican reports, traffic on the train declined 11% from the second part of 2009 to the second part of 2010.

The train’s advocates claim that not running the train for Balloon Fiesta had a major impact (and for one month it did have an impact), but ridership declined every single month. Besides, the decision to not run the train for Fiesta was due to budget constraints and the fact that the train loses money with every passenger it carries. If this were not the case, then the train should have run for Governor Martinez’s inauguration.

Gov. Martinez remains non-committal on whether or not to continue the train in the foreseeable future.

As readers at this space undoubtedly know, we at the Rio Grande Foundation have argued for cuts to higher education. One area we neglected to mention is continuing education. These are basically classes that are not taken for credit and often involve yoga or tennis classes and a variety of things like couples counseling that are offered in the private sector (check out a UNM Continuing Ed catalog here).

Well, as part of Martinez’s efforts to eliminate the budget deficit, there will be cuts to continuing education, including a very generous benefit of free classes which is enjoyed by university employees. This is a good move, but according to the Journal article “Continuing Education sent a mass e-mail Friday asking students and supporters to contact university officials, including President David Schmidly’s office, to oppose the recommendation.”

I for one am sick and tired of government employees who ostensibly serve the taxpayer lobbying against cuts to their own departments or agencies. It would seem that using university resources for this purpose should be a firing offense. I hope UNM will put Joseph Miera, associate dean for Continuing Education, or whoever was responsible for the email under scrutiny for this.

Heaven forbid, taxpayers no longer have to subsidize someone’s tennis lessons or yoga classes (these classes are offered at campuses across the state).

Rio Grande Foundation board member (and pediatric cardiologist) Deane Waldman explains at American Thinker who the “true liberals” are. While the term has been tarnished in the American lexicon by decades of socialists mis-representing themselves as “liberals,” it is worth explaining the situation every once in a while, particularly since in most foreign countries, “liberals” still are labeled appropriately.

Oh, and as Jonah Goldberg writes, after billions in aid, Haiti is in dire need of free market liberal policies.

If there’s one thing that’s as reliable as the sun coming up, it’s that public employee unions (like the Albuquerque Teachers Federation) believe that bigger government is better and that taxes should go up. So, it was with absolutely no surprise that I saw this “news” story from KOAT Channel 7 that included union leader Ellen Bernstein calling for the budget deficit to be closed with “creative revenue sources.” Bernstein went on to suggest taxing alcohol to generate $43 million and suggests that the governor close corporate tax loopholes to bring in more revenue for the state.

Of course, Bernstein and her union buddies flatly refuse to even consider that maybe, just maybe, there is some bloat and waste in New Mexico’s budget. Nor do they wish to comprehend that the $70 million shelled out for the film industry or the $20+ million spent on the Rail Runner could have any negative impact on their own budgets.

For a far more interesting discussion of New Mexico’s budget situation, check out this interview I did with Fred Martino of NewsMakers in Las Cruces. My interview starts at the 5:15 minute mark:

It is not getting a great deal of publicity, but Albuquerque Public Schools is having a board election on February 1. Early voting is now under way and readers of this site are strongly urged to learn about the candidates running in their districts and vote for those who will reform APS.

And, if the APS board isn’t enough to get you to the polls, how about a $70 million tax cut? That is what homeowners could see on their taxes if they vote “no” on the CNM bond that is also on the ballot.

While CNM is among New Mexico’s more efficient providers of higher education services, the reality is that we need to wean higher education off of the taxpayer dole. Innovation and efficiency in higher education will only come about if it is financially imperative. Getting out to vote and telling CNM that more reforms and more efficiency are necessary will be a good start.