The Rio Grande Foundation is proud of its conservative credentials and suffer the slings and arrows of those who sometimes call us a “front group” for Republicans. But, we are about good policy, not party politics. That is why we recently had some kind words for Rep. Mimi Stewart (a liberal Democrat) to the consternation of some prominent Republicans (read the comments at the previous link).

Well, last night after our Las Cruces Liberty on the Rocks, I went directly into the “belly of the beast” when I visited the “progressive voter alliance” in Las Cruces. I was there thanks to Sen. Steve Fischmann who, while we disagree on a variety of issues, agrees with and supports much of the “Florida Model” for K-12 reforms and Gov. Martinez’s educational efforts.

I had four minutes to present, and was given a fair hearing for my views. If anything, the main concern that the 50 or so folks at the meeting had was the need to address underlying poverty issues that go far deeper than any “education” reform can. And, while I know that we at RGF and the PVA folks probably disagree 90+ percent of the time, I think education is one big issue that there may be some common ground on. Hopefully build and then leverage that support to get more robust education reforms the next time the Legislature meets.

Don’t tell the left, but the Rio Grande Foundation and the Foundation for Open Government share a significant interest in open and transparent government. It provides accountability and enables citizens to understand how their money is being used.

To that end, we at RGF are pleased to encourage readers of this blog and all citizen activists to attend FOG’s Open Government Academy on Saturday.

New Mexico Foundation for Open Government presents

“Open Government Academy” Learn how to access your government!

Where: UNM School of Law, Room 2401

When: Saturday, March 26, 2011, 9:30 a.m.- 3 p.m.

For more information, go to: www.nmfog.org or call (888) 843-9121

You have a fundamental right to access public information and petition your government. But do you know how?

You’re invited to the Open Government Academy – this Saturday, March 26 at 9:30 AM in Albuquerque. This one-day workshop is geared toward community organizers, non-profit professionals and other citizens interested in accessing their government and influencing policy. We’ll discuss how to use public-records and open-meetings “sunshine” laws, how to tap into information resources used by journalists and lawyers, how to lobby state and local officials, and much more.

A limited number of scholarships are available to cover a $25 registration fee. For more information, call (888) 843-9121 or visit www.nmfog.org

Legislation has passed both houses of the Legislature that would set up so-called “insurance exchanges” that are a component of ObamaCare. Originally found in Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts state takeover of health care, the “exchange” is, according to Pete Sunderman of Reason: a highly regulated, government-run marketplace where individuals can shop for health insurance, by 2014. Each state is required to either show progress on building an exchange by 2013 or make way for the federal government to build and manage one directly.

Sunderman goes on to explain that “These exchanges are the chief method by which the federal government will exert control over the insurance marketplace… The Department of Health and Human Services will have the authority to determine minimum health insurance requirements for most medical services and providers as well as cost-sharing details for plans offered through the exchanges.”

As John Graham and I write today over at NMPolitics.net, New Mexico should not assist the Obama Administration in their hostile takeover of American healthcare.

The Environmental Protection Agency has a draconian plan for reducing emissions from the San Juan Generating Station in Northwest New Mexico. According to the Albuquerque Journal, the plan will cost $1 billion (or $90 a year for 20 years for the average residential customer and much more for larger users). This comes on top of $320 million in equipment that was recently installed by the plant’s owner Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, particulate matter and mercury. Now, the EPA wants another bite of the apple.

But, a recent proposal from the New Mexico Environment Department, could save rate-payers hundreds-of-millions of dollars. According to PNM, the state plan would be far less costly, in the range of $250 million, making the difference in impacts to ratepayers substantial. The question is whether the EPA will go along with the more reasonable deal.

The EPA’s comment period is open (sorry for the Sierra Club link, but the contact information is the same even if our comments will be different).

In judging the recently-concluded 2011 legislative session, many policies were considered. The Rio Grande Foundation played a major role in setting the agenda in terms of education reform, the budget debate, government employee pension reform, and in expanding government transparency.

Unfortunately, two of the three education reforms promoted by Gov. Martinez failed: only A-F grading of schools passed. Notably, Martinez was only promoting a portion of the whole Florida model — virtual schools and dramatically-expanded school choice were not part of her initial efforts this year.

In terms of the budget, it must be noted that NO TAXES WERE RAISED. This is very important. In terms of budget fixes, we had proposed capping the film subsidy at $30 million and it wound up at $50 million. Not too shabby. Rather than some of the deeper and more substantive cuts we’d outlined elsewhere in our budget cut proposal, more moderate efforts were undertaken. In a big disappointment, the Legislature chose to continue over-paying for public works projects by not returning to the previous manner of determining wages on public works projects.

Pensions were addressed somewhat, but far more needs to be done in this regard.

Transparency will move forward based on bills that passed this session. New Mexico schools will be added to the Sunshine Portal and governments will also be expected to release information they possess in electronic format in that format upon request. These are positive steps.

Overall, the biggest disappointments were the failure to really embrace the education reforms and return to a more rational system of wage rules for government projects, but several steps were taken towards liberty this year.

“The only way for someone to get richer is for someone else to get poorer. In an adversarial system the adversaries are workers and capitalists.”

Sounds like Karl Marx to me. It’s also a completely and factually inaccurate statement that can be proven so. After all, if the only way for one person to get rich is for someone to get “screwed,” then how has society progressed at all? Or, are we all living some kind of fantasy believing that our life spans have lengthened and we’re no longer going to the bathroom in outdoor pits? For answers to these and many more questions, you should talk to comrade Guy Watson who wrote this incredibly ignorant article in the Albuquerque Journal.

Perhaps the most absurd idea to take from Watson’s screed is that inventors from Thomas Edison to Bill Gates somehow take from the rest of us in order to earn their fortunes. In reality, it is the inventions of these and others who enable us to be productive so that an overwhelming number of us have homes with running water, color tv’s, and the internet. I’m not sure what Watson is smoking.

As an aside, it seems that there have been an awful lot of articles in the Journal from current and former professors at UNM. An overwhelming majority have been from a far left perspective. It would seem that UNM is offering a full-employment plan for left wing professors and that this is yet another reason to cut taxpayer funding and force it and other universities to compete in a free market.

To hear all the crocodile tears from Wisconsin and other states, government labor unions are the only thing standing between them and bread lines or homelessness. A recent story from Albuquerque illustrates a far different reality and illustrates the incredible privileges given to powerful government unions.

The case is specifically that of a bus driver that showed up for work drunk. In the “real” world where the rest of us live, we’d be fired for showing up drunk to most any job — even a desk job — let alone one where your job is to drive other people around town. If you’re a member of a powerful government labor union, however, you get to take a few classes and then get your job back. And, you get to go on almost 5 months of PAID leave in the meantime!!!!

I wonder what would have happened had no one noticed the guy was drunk and he went out and killed someone. Would the union have managed to get him a slap on the wrist and his job back for that too??? I love the statement by AFSCME boss Rocky Gutierrez “We believe in public safety number one.” Right.

The left is claiming that Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker is trying to “kill the American Dream” in Wisconsin. Last time I checked, showing up drunk for a job involved in public safety isn’t part of the “American Dream.”

There has been a lot of talk at both the state and national levels over cutting spending and whether those cuts harm poor people. I just don’t think it is so. One recent writer on the topic is Sen. Pete Campos. His piece which appeared in the Albuquerque Journal asserted that:

“Each dollar that we cut from education reduces a child’s chance of succeeding. Each dollar we cut from social services makes it more difficult for less-fortunate New Mexicans to get the mental and physical health care, food, or housing they need….”

The idea that spending cuts automatically harm the poor is not accurate for a few main reasons:

First and foremost, government is not usually the most efficient provider of said goods and services. For starters, government schools have spent more and more money per-pupil over the years with little to show for it in the way of results. Campos (and others) never question whether government is doing what it does — whether it is education or welfare — at optimal efficiency. In a more efficient system, services could be provided at a far lower cost, but in ways that improve living standards;

Secondly, much of what government does is used to benefit the wealthy, not the poor. The Rail Runner, Spaceport, and film subsidies are just a few of the big government programs enacted in recent years that disproportionately benefit the wealthy. Also, in terms of welfare, middle class government bureaucrats consume 25% or more of welfare spending.

This discussion is primarily focused on the state level, but Canada and New Zealand are just two countries that have dramatically reduced spending and restructured government. These reforms have led to economic growth and improvements for the poor (and all sectors of society). New Mexico (and the US Congress) need to follow their examples.

There are some out there now saying that the devastation in Japan is going to be a good thing for the nation’s economy. To say the least, this is counterintuitive, but some smart people are making the point including former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers. The problem is that the idea is totally wrong.

Bastiat, one of the greatest economic writers of all time, made the point succinctly in his pamphlet “The Broken Window.” Matt Kibbe from Freedomworks also does a nice job applying Bastiat’s points directly to Japan. So does Peter Schiff in this video.

The ultimate point of all this is that over the next months and years, we’ll plainly be able to see the rebuilding efforts in Japan. What we won’t see is what individual Japanese would have done with their resources in terms of both investment and consumption that would have raised their own living standards (and ours) at the same time. Also worth noting is that Japan’s government is already in bad shape in terms of debt (worse than even the US). How will this debt burden hinder Japan’s rebuilding? Only time will tell.

I have not blogged here about the situation in Japan because, unlike Rahm Emmanuel, I don’t believe that a good crisis is a terrible thing to waste. But, I was struck in reading today’s Albuquerque Journal by the incredible difference between Jonah Goldberg and Eugene Robinson in their views on the tsunami and subsequent nuclear crisis in Japan.

Goldberg recognizes that the situation in Japan is serious and sympathizes with the victims of the tragedy. But, he understands that every form of energy — just as nearly every human action — has some negative consequences. But, wind and solar are simply not capable of producing enough power to replace nuclear. We could use coal and other fossil fuels, but if global warming is real, that could be an even bigger problem. Goldberg grasps that there are no easy answers.

Robinson, on the other hand, seems to demand easy answers but is unable to come up with them, so he just sows fear. While acknowledging the same facts as Goldberg, Robinson asks a lot of questions that remain unanswerable at this point. Ultimately, he seems to demand total security which, as we know in this uncertain world, is simply not possible.

The conservative/free market side again projects calmness and rationality in the face of a threat while the left spreads fear…unfortunately, this is far too common.

Astute readers of this blog will note that we at the Rio Grande Foundation are consistent advocates for limited government. Sometimes, this means agreeing with folks that we have deep philosophical differences with on a wide variety of policy issues. One of those people would be liberal Rep. Mimi Stewart. Well, as this report from Capitol Report’s Rob Nikolewski today is one of those days for strange bedfellows.

Stewart has sponsored HB 644 which, as Nikolewski noted:

Calls for members of the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) and the Educational Retirement Board (ERB) who have less than five years’ service to work longer terms before becoming eligible for retirement in order for the PERA and ERB pension plans to become actuarially solvent.

Uniformed public employees — such as police officers and firefighters — are exempt from the changes.

The bill also calls for adjustments in the PERA cost of living adjustments — ending the current system in which PERA retirees receive a 3 percent annual cost of living raise and instead would tie the cost of living adjustment to the Consumer Price Index.

A former public school teacher, Stewart said unless something is done to the current pension plans, taxpayers could be on the hook for $1.2 billion in order to keep the plans solvent.

While I’d like to see more, deeper changes to New Mexico’s pension system, the fact is that Stewart’s bill was an important start. Thus the hostile reaction from AFSCME lobbyist Carter Bundy as discussed in the article.

Both House votes have been posted online with the first vote and second vote. Notably, several Republicans changed their votes to achieve passage in the second vote.

With time running out in the session, it is hard to say what (if anything) will happen in the Senate.

“Buying local” is all the rage these days in New Mexico. From this opinion piece in the Las Cruces Sun-News to this legislation introduced by Sen. Tim Keller which would require state agencies and the public schools to increase the amount of food purchased from in-state producers.

Now, I’m not opposed at all to people (or businesses) that want to purchase food from local producers wherever possible. But, the fact is that it is interstate and international trade that leads to better quality products, a wider variety of products, and less costly goods at our stores. Those who would stand in the way of a Traders Joe’s or would mandate that government agencies purchase from local producers will ultimately harm the citizens of New Mexico as a whole.

For starters, how many tropical products just aren’t produced in New Mexico? Do you really want school children and their families to go without pineapples, coffee, and oranges (to name just a few of dozens of products that are not produced in significant quantities in New Mexico)?

Then there is water usage. In case you haven’t noticed, it has been really dry this year. New Mexico faces real water issues in the future if it does not conserve. But let’s be clear, the problem is NOT caused by the big cities. Agriculture uses an astonishing 90% of New Mexico’s water. Mandating that even more agricultural products are produced in New Mexico will only intensify agriculture’s water usage.

The answer, quite simply, is for both the federal and state governments to stop subsidizing agriculture and to allow a truly free market in food. If you want to purchase organic, free range, New Mexico-produced goods, that is your choice (and you’ll pay whatever premium there is), just don’t force the rest of us to adopt your “foodie” habits.

The talk in Santa Fe, Washington, and all over the nation is about jobs. How to get them, how to grow them, and how to keep one once you have one. As this interesting blog points out, one way to help the job situation would be to eliminate the minimum wage.

The point is to not have a bunch of heads-of-household supporting their families on less than $7.25 an hour, but with teenagers having an unemployment rate of 24%, it would be great to have more young people benefiting from learning the skills of work and obtaining some extra money rather than hanging around on the streets and hunting for a job.

This doesn’t even factor in what would be derived from taxes paid and the businesses that would gain from a new pool of workers.

I sat through a lengthy hearing of the House Business and Industry Committee on Thursday, March 10th. Floor session ran late, so the hearing did not get going until after 7pm. No problem.

I was there to testify on separate legislation, but during the hearing HB 99 sponsored by Rep. Nora Espinoza came up for discussion. The bill is very simple. It would have allowed “anesthesiologist assistants” to work at hospitals outside of UNM Hospital here in Albuquerque. Currently, anesthesiologist assistants (AA’s) are limited to working at one hospital while Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists (CRNA’s) can work anywhere. Needless to say, the CRNA’s were out in force to testify against the bill — in order to protect their market monopoly — while the AA’s also were out in force to gain more employment opportunities. The testimony and questions were emotional on both sides.

The issue is about economic freedom plain and simple. Hospitals would not be forced to hire AA’s if they don’t want to. If you are concerned about rising health care costs, it only makes sense to expand the number of people who can work in a particular field.

But, in what I can only describe as a shocking but not entirely surprising vote, all six Republicans on the committee supported the effort while all six Democrats opposed it. Thus, the bill died. Simply put, the Republicans supported economic freedom while the Democrats seemed to believe that unless the AA’s could “prove” that their services were absolutely necessary, they should not have the right to work in the specific field. This is backwards thinking and is a major problem for New Mexico. Voters need to understand that this attitude keeps business and economic activity from coming here and causes New Mexicans to remain dependent on government….unfortunately, that may be the very reason these legislators oppose economic freedom.

APS Board Chair Martin Esquivel claims that we at the Rio Grande Foundation are all wrong about APS and that the school district is doing a great job. He also claims that the district’s buildings shouldn’t count as money spent per-pupil by the district. Sure, capital spending and annual appropriations are taken out of two different pots, but the fact is that money is money and in the real world, those dollars must be considered as part of what APS spends per pupil.

Esquivel does make one accurate claim and that is that the district must accept all kids that show up on their doorstep. Having disruptive “students” in the classroom is undoubtedly a problem for teachers in the classroom, but there are plenty of things APS could do differently and better. For starters, he should rent himself a copy of “Waiting for Superman” as I did this weekend. Esquivel could see in that movie how impoverished inner-city kids can learn and graduate at rates exceeding 90 percent. Compare that with APS where 23 of the 34 high schools are considered “dropout factories.”

Of course Esquivel does not mention exactly what APS’s graduation rate is, but according to the best information I have from the “Diplomas Count 2010,” New Mexico’s state graduation rate is 54.9%. I find it hard to believe that APS’s real graduation rate is much better.

Oh, and one important thing to note is that APS alone is not at fault. The federal government, state government, local school boards, teacher unions, and yes, even parents, all have a role to play in the ongoing failure. The problem is that the first step in solving a problem is recognizing that you have one. Esquivel clearly doesn’t think APS needs to change and improve.

Liberals love to say that Social Security is “the most popular government program.” There is an element of truth to this statement as the people who will be bearing the burden for the system and not receiving much in the way of “benefits” are either young or not born yet.

But, I’d love to see the folks who defend the popularity of the program show some confidence in their statement by making it optional. I would be thrilled to take them (and the federal government) up on this. I just received my “Social Security Statement.” According to the number crunchers over at SSA, I have paid more than $35,000 in Social Security taxes and more than $8,000 in Medicare taxes.

I have a grand bargain. I’ll allow the federal government to hold onto my $44,000 (actually it is more than that since the statement only covers earnings through 2009). I’ll sign a document stating that I’ll never take Social Security or Medicare if I can hold on to — and invest on my own — the money that my employer and I would pay for Social Security. Heck, I’ll even sign another document saying that I’ll invest the money and won’t touch it until I’m 65. The way I figure it, the feds are coming out way ahead.

Perhaps I am in the minority in my willingness to take such drastic action, but I’d rather control my own financial future than rely on the benevolence of the federal government. After all, my wonderful “statement” from the government also contains this fine line which states “Your estimated benefits are based on current law. Congress has made changes to the law in the past and can do so at any time.” Not exactly reassuring.

If Social Security is so popular, let’s make it optional or let workers “buy out” of the system and invest for themselves.

After weeks of protest and unrest, Wisconsin is moving forward with Gov. Scott Walker’s efforts to balance his state’s budget and eliminate collective bargaining for government workers. This is a win for Gov. Scott Walker and Wisconsin taxpayers.

Dealing with the unsustainable budgets and spending on government workers is important to making state budgets sustainable. It is also why other states are looking to reform their agreements with government workers.

As Thomas Sowell writes, “there is no such thing as a free lunch,” but in a competitive, free market economy, “government unions continue to thrive while private sector unions decline because taxpayers provide their free lunch.”

Only time will tell how the battles in Wisconsin and so many other states ultimately turns out, but Gov. Walker deserves credit for taking a difficult stand.

Today, a former APS teacher responded to Elisabeth Keen’s recent opinion piece on education and spending at APS. He said that comparing per pupil spending at The Academy and APS is not “apples to apples.” I tend to agree with him.

The Academy is one of the most expensive private schools in the nation and it has a large endowment including private donations and land. It also is selective in which students are allowed to enter. So, yes, the two are clearly different.

But, the Academy is not the only private school in the City. As Keen noted, there are other, much less-costly schools in town. Like the Academy, those schools also have graduation rates upwards of 90%. And, that is the biggest non apples-to-apples comparison of all: graduation rates and learning.

The private options succeed where APS fails, so comparing the two is really not fair. Of course, the Rio Grande Foundation and others have proposed initiatives that would allow kids currently trapped in failing public schools to attend private schools, but the education establishment has opposed them. As a writer from LULAC noted in a recent column, there are bills introduced in the session, but they face stiff opposition.

So, if and when kids in APS are allowed the choice of attending private schools, I think they’ll perform very well. If APS and their supporters are so confident that they are delivering a good product at a reasonable cost, they shouldn’t be worried about a little competition, should they?

The Rio Grande Foundation released a report on the costs to New Mexico utility customers of the state’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS).

Paul Chesser of the American Tradition Institute had an article in the Santa Fe New Mexican and Marita Noon of CARE had her own article in Energy Tribune.

If New Mexico’s elected leaders are serious about creating jobs and making our state more economically-competitive and ultimately wealthier, the RPS must be addressed.

The Rio Grande Foundation’s capitol reporter Rob Nikolewski has done a great deal of research over at Capitol Report New Mexico on the naming of public facilities after sitting elected officials. There are many reasons for NOT allowing this practice to continue including the need to remove Manny Aragon’s name from the Torreon at the National Hispanic Cultural Center.

But, as Rob reports, legislation sponsored by Sen. Mark Boitano to stop the practice (at least at the state level), was recently killed. While it may or may not actually corrupt a lawmaker’s decision on a given project or piece of legislation, the fact is that these people are supposed to be public servants. Allowing them to name things after themselves leads to ego inflation and arrogance. That is the real problem with “Monuments to Me.”

It is great to see LULAC coming out in favor of school choice as they did in this recent opinion piece. School choice tax credits work and are popular with parents and students as the writer notes has happened in Utah.

New Mexico’s education system is failing ALL New Mexico kids and a majority of those kids are Hispanic. As the author notes, legislation is moving forward right now that would provide tax credit scholarships for low-income and special needs children. His organization “strongly supports HB 510 and HB 427, to give our special needs kids and lower-income students a chance at success.”

Before the legislative session, we at the Rio Grande Foundation recommended that spending on higher education be cut. The University of New Mexico has experienced some cuts (totaling approximately 12 percent) since the recession began, but that doesn’t mean they have a “lean and mean” operation by any stretch of the imagination.

For starters, there is the lobbying. While we have not previously commented on this specific issue, it seems rather unfair that taxpayers are paying the salaries of these officials who (at taxpayer expense) ply elected officials with drinks, and ultimately are lobbying for more of our taxpayer money. Where are the taxpayer-funded lobbyists for LESS government spending???

Oh, and, in what might be the worst idea since Michael Weiner advocated buying the County Line Restaurant and turning it into a community center, today the Albuquerque Journal reports that the University wants to spend $3 million on a new baseball stadium because Isotopes Park is “inadequate.” Complaints include “too many empty seats” and that the park “doesn’t feel like our home.”

Wow. Is this a university or a sports franchise? Certainly, there are efficiencies to be had throughout the UNM budget (including academics), but asking for a $3 million stadium when you have a perfectly fine (even professional grade) facility right next door takes some real gall. If UNM’s regents have any brains at all, they’ll turn this ridiculous proposal down.

Over at NMPolitics.net, I address some points made in a recent column by AFSCME’s Carter Bundy. I also explain that despite the lack of Wisconsin or Ohio-style unrest over government employee pensions, New Mexico still has a serious problem that must be dealt with sooner than later and that liberals should be at least as conservatives are about the problem.

It has been a big couple of days for the Rio Grande Foundation board. Elisabeth Keen took APS to task for its ineffectiveness and lack of transparency, now Board Member Deane Waldman and former Rep. Martin Heinrich health care town hall panelist Dr. John Vigil wrote an excellent article explaining why health care is not and should not be a “right.”