Awhile back I wrote about the many issues with “Medicare for All.” Dr. J. Deane Waldman, a
University of New Mexico professor in the Health Sciences Center, offers a few “inconvenient truths” about Medicare.

Medicare was intended to be self-sustaining by having workers pay in while employed and taking out of the fund as needed after they retired. It was supposed to pay for itself: no additional funds required. Hah!

Inconvenient truth #1: Medicare quickly became a Ponzi scheme just like Social Security. According to the Government Accounting Office, Medicare will run out of funds in 2017, even before Social Security. The addition of President Bush’s ill-conceived Drug Program For Seniors sped up a process of collapse by adding another (unpaid for by the contributors) entitlement. Medicare-for-all will be no care for all.

Medicare tries to contain its costs in two ways: neither works and neither is what patients want. First, it rations care. Yes, I said it. Many things your doctor would like for you are denied as not “cost effective.”

Let’s just ignore inconvenient truth #2, that there are at present virtually no scientific cost effectiveness studies on which the government denies payment. Denying payment means denying care and thus again, Medicare-for-all is no care for all.

Inconvenient truth #2A: Beware of what President Obama is touting as cost-effectiveness studies in the proposed health care reform bill. Just like in Great Britain and Australia, what the government defines as effective is often not what patients and doctors want as positive effects.

While the “public option ” seems to be dead for now, it will inevitably come back again. Professor Waldman’s points are highly persuasive.

There is an organization called Hispanos Unidos that is working to make sure that the American principle of “one person, one vote” is adhered to. If you are heading to the polls in municipal elections around New Mexico, you may have noticed that for the first time photo ID is required. This will go a long way towards ensuring that elections results are accurate and that only the votes of those who should vote are counted. For the record, it is my belief that both same-day voters and absentee voters should have more stringent requirements.

Following are some of the excellent television ads run by Hispanos Unidos. Check this one out about a proposal to register and vote on the same day:

Photo ID did not come easy. Here is an ad they did in an attempt to shame some of the opponents of voter ID:

Not directly related to voter fraud is this recent ad encouraging people to attend the Las Cruces Tea Party.

At long last, the federal government has its new stimulus-tracking website up and running. Interested taxpayers and journalists can now start digging to find out where some of the billions of dollars that have been printed up in Washington under Obama’s stimulus plan are going. The website is recovery.gov and can be found here. Particularly interesting to me was the area of the site that tracked spending of stimulus money in New Mexico.

You are encouraged to go in and look at specific grants, loans, and contracts in your area. A few that I noticed in Albuquerque included a $480,000 loan to O’Neill’s Pub on Central. A Cold Stone Creamery ice cream shop got another $800,000 loan.

As I told Santa Fe New Mexican reporter Kate Nash, the website, while useful, raises more questions than answers. Hopefully average citizens will take a closer look at some of the businesses receiving this money and find out for themselves whether the federal government should really be involved in all of this.

South Valley-area Representative Miguel Garcia has a really entertaining column on the state’s budget crisis and steps that need to be taken to resolve it in today’s Albuquerque Journal. Garcia, who is apparently just to the left of Karl Marx, portrays Governor Richardson, who cut income and capital gains taxes during his term, as a radical free marketeer. That isn’t the end of Garcia’s confusion.

First and foremost, Garcia claims to wish to cut “wasteful spending” to solve the budget crisis, but he outlines nary a program that he wants to cut. Rather, in Garcia-land, all money apparently belongs to the government and he and his cronies in Santa Fe are in charge of giving us the scraps that aren’t spent on their noble causes. Where else could one get the line (referring to the supposed lack of multiplier associated with tax cuts “one New Mexico government dollar invested in personal income tax breaks for the wealthiest New Mexicans is a negative investment.”

Of course, when economists and politicians start talking about “multipliers,” I know that they are lying. If $1 invested in infrastructure really were “multiplied” 1.59 times, the only responsible thing for any politician to do would be to raise taxes to 100% and spend 100% of government revenue on infrastructure. Of course, in the real world, things don’t work out this way. Multipliers are simply another way for those who want to do something the want to do with your money, to convince you that they have your best interests in mind (particularly when they don’t).

While I could spend many pages critiquing Garcia’s arguments, there is one more that merits special attention: the idea that cutting income taxes would “bring more millionaires to New Mexico.” This is simply non-sensical. By definition, millionaires have already done rather well for themselves. Cutting income and capital gains taxes will encourage entrepreneurs to become millionaires by starting businesses, working hard, and making smart investments here in New Mexico. That is why cutting taxes is such a powerful tool for economic development and Garcia is so far off base. Regardless of tax cuts, New Mexico has a ways to go before it has the kind of tax and regulatory policies it needs to be an economic leader, but the tax cuts we’ve seen in recent years have gone a long way towards pushing us up from the very bottom. Hopefully Richardson, John Arthur Smith, Tim Jennings, and others in Santa Fe ignore Garcia’s advice and reduce spending instead of putting New Mexico back to pre-2003 tax rates (or worse).

Oh, and kudos to the Guv!

I have repeatedly cited the use of taxpayer money to lobby citizens for even more government spending as a serious problem. Now, enclosed in your most recent water bill from the government-controlled Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water Authority, “customers” of the authority are receiving the following notices alerting them to the 1/4 cent transportation tax on the ballot with language that clearly endorses the tax. Check out both sides of the insert below:

Now, I understand that they don’t explicitly come out and say “vote for the tax,” but the intent is clear. I have two major problems with the mailing, first and foremost, opponents are not given equal time to explain why extending the tax is a bad idea (even if we don’t say “vote no.” Secondly, the water authority should be a private entity, not a government one. Were it privately-controlled, such favors would not be done or would not be done without a fight , but with City Councilors on the Wather Authority Board, it is no surprise that this was done.

Tell the governing board what you think via the previous link or email the Authority here: wainfo@abcwua.org

Did you know that the federal government owns nearly 50 percent of the land area in New Mexico? Check out the map below and you’ll be surprised to see just how much of the Land of Enchantment the Feds control

Why is that so important? Well, our Senators, Jeff Bingaman and Tom Udall, have introduced legislation S. 1689 that would put another 259,000 acres of land under federal control, by designating the land as wilderness. The government would not “own” the land, but it would be virtually impossible to do anything economically-viable with the land.

Now, I’m not here to argue that the land in question that surrounds the Organ Mountains is not historically-significant or geologically-unique. But I will say that I find it hard to justify even further federal control over what is becoming ever more rare and limited land remaining under private control in New Mexico. Rather than simply giving the feds ever-greater power to regulate land use in New Mexico, perhaps we should set a cap, say 40%, over which the federal government cannot own or manage as wilderness. If they want to control more than that, then they have to sell off or return control over the land to local citizens.

At the very least, rather than having the federal government come in and take this action, why not put the decision in the hands of legislators and those who actually represent us in the Legislature in Santa Fe?

At last weekend’s New Mexico Turnaround Conference, I presented a wide variety of facts and figures on the state of the state of New Mexico as it compares to other states on a variety of economic and education measures. Check the presentation out here.

A few days ago, I read the following headline for an opinion piece in the ABQ Journal “Bill Needs States’ Flexibility.” The article, surprisingly enough, was not written by some free market advocate, but some folks from the Health Security for New Mexicans Campaign. While the group’s mission statement does not explicitly state it, the group’s goal is to promote government-run health care in New Mexico.

Thus, the point of the op-ed was to encourage Congress and President Obama to include language in any health care legislation that “gives states the flexibility to develop their own approaches to solving the problems of growing numbers of uninsured and rising health care costs.” Now, there is no doubt that these folks want a government option and we at the Rio Grande Foundation want less government intervention in the health care marketplace, we can agree that federalism is superior to a top-down “reform” undertaken in Washington.

It would be great if all states had the freedom to opt in and out of various government programs and, more importantly, if each state had to foot the bill for those programs. After all, a program is hardly optional if the federal government is offering a 3 for 1 match for states to expand those programs (as is offered for Medicaid in New Mexico).

Also, I hope that the federal government will respect the wishes of states (Arizona voters will be voting on just such a ballot measure in 2010) to opt out of any government-run health care system.

New Mexico’s free market think tank, the Rio Grande Foundation, and CARE, the Citizens Alliance for Responsible Energy, are teaming up – along with dozens of organizations nationwide – for a simultaneous, world premier film event.

What: World premier of the film “Not Evil, Just Wrong,” which takes on the conventional wisdom on global warming. We are coordinating with the filmmakers and hundreds of other groups nationwide to qualify this event for the Guinness Book of World Records.
When: On October 18, 2009, at 6pm,
Where: The Las Cruces Allen Theatres Cineport 10 which is located at 700 S. Telshor,
Who: The Rio Grande Foundation and CARE.
Cost: Price of this full-length feature-film event is $8.00.

Global warming remains one of the most controversial issues of our times. Some, like Al Gore, President Obama, and many environmentalists, believe that radical action to curtail emissions must be undertaken immediately; regardless of the impact such actions will have on our economy and way of life.

Others like the makers of “Not Evil, Just Wrong” and the leaders of the Rio Grande Foundation and CARE, question the science behind human-caused global warming, but even more importantly question whether solutions to other, more immediate challenges must be sacrificed in order to minimally impact a supposed problem that has not been directly linked to the death of a single person.

“Not Evil, Just Wrong,” explores the science of global warming with a skeptic’s eye, but it also links the current “crisis” of global warming to other supposed crises that mankind has faced in recent memory. Some like “Y2K” and Africanized honey bees making their way over the Mexican border created temporary panics, but did not really damage our society. Others, like the banning of the pesticide DDT without ample scientific evidence have resulted in millions of unnecessary deaths among the most impoverished peoples on the planet.

The draconian measures that must be undertaken not only here in America, but around the world in order to have a measurable impact on CO2 emissions, like the banning of DDT, will have harmful impacts on all of us, but will disproportionately affect those who can least afford it, the world’s poor.

More information about the film is available at: www.noteviljustwrong.com Come out and enjoy the film, but more importantly, take the film to heart and take action!

For further information contact: Paul Gessing at 505-264-6090 or Marita Noon at 505-239-8998.

I am a Catholic. I’m also an economic conservative. Apparently this makes me a bad Catholic. At least that is the impression I get from an opinion piece that appeared in today’s Albuquerque Journal by Allen Sanchez of the New Mexico Conference of Catholic Bishops.

The basic point Sanchez makes in his article, “Don’t Balance Budget on Backs of the Poor,” is that we should not cut spending AT ALL to close the $433 million budget deficit we now face. Instead, we need to repeal the 2003 income tax hikes, raise corporate taxes, and close other “tax loopholes.” In other words, your typical left-wing claptrap. This view is not only inconsistent, it is a prescription for economic stagnation.

First and foremost, most government spending is not for the benefit of the poor. The RailRunner, Spaceport, and film subsidies are just three major wasteful projects that, if they benefit anyone, benefit the wealthy to a far greater extent than they do the poor. Where was the Catholic Church questioning this wasteful spending?

Also, there are other cuts that can be made that will not hurt the poor, but will help them. As I wrote in this recent opinion piece, certain Medicaid reforms can remove wealthy recipients who don’t need it from the system. Other reforms to the same system will actually empower the poor rather than keeping them trapped in a well-intentioned albeit misguided Medicaid system.

The fact is that there are still cuts to be made in New Mexico’s budget. On the other hand, many of the programs supposedly designed to benefit the poor actually do more harm than good. Lastly, while Sanchez fails to acknowledge this fact, making it more difficult to do business in New Mexico through higher taxes will inevitably harm the poor by cutting off job opportunities and stifling economic growth.

Recently, a story about Santa Fe County lending $6 million for a movie study was covered in the local media, but did not receive much attention. In the past, the Rio Grande Foundation (using data produced by the state’s own Legislative Finance Council) has been critical of efforts to subsidize the film industry in New Mexico.

Now, as if the fact that their clients are subsidized through a 25% rebate on production costs and millions in interest-free loans, according to this story from the Associated Press, one group of studio “investors” is receiving $6 million in handouts from the County of Santa Fe and 10 million taxpayer dollars from Governor Richardson to build a studio near Santa Fe.

Where does it end? New Mexico already has the privately-built Albuquerque Studios (no direct government investment was made in the project). Now, when cuts are being made to all aspects of New Mexico’s budget, taxpayers are being forced to throw money at a competing studio, the clients of which are already receiving a generous and unlimited subsidy.

In cae you missed it, the New Mexico Turnaround Conference which took place in Albuquerque on September 18 and 19 was an amazing and useful event. Some incredible speakers came to offer their thoughts on the issues of the day and how to move New Mexico (and the nation) forward.

John Fund of the Wall Street Journal was one of the prominent speakers. His talk can be found below:

On this week’s episode, Jim talks with two members of the USS New Mexico Committee about their efforts to raise awareness of the world’s most technoligically advanced submarine an its significance for our national defense and our state.

Then, Jim is joined by John Bode, who is suing the city of Albuquerque for civil rights violations allegedly resulting from retaliation following his refusal to provide free flights to Mexico for Mayor Martin Chavez. But it doesn’t stop there. John Bode is a former APD internal affairs investigator and he’s been digging into potential waste, fraud and abuse in the Balloon Museum and other public works.

Listen here.

Recently, Marc Levin of the Texas Public Policy Foundation and I collaborated on a paper that discussed some common-sense criminal justice reforms for New Mexico. Given the current budgetary environment facing New Mexico, such reforms can both save taxpayers money and reduce the number of people who get caught up in the criminal justice system.

Our opinion piece on the topic which appeared in several papers including the Las Cruces Sun-News can be found here.

Since 2003, Governor Bill Richardson has been spending tens of millions of dollars of public funds without Legislative authorization. These funds have been received into the state treasury under Federal economic relief and stimulus bills. Richardson has unilaterally been deciding how these funds should be spend, in violation of the state constitution which rests the power to appropriate public money solely with the Legislature.

Jim Scarantino, the Rio Grande Foundation’s investigative journalist, looked into the situation. Scarantino, in his new report “The Governor’s Unconstitutional Spending of Public Funds without Legislative Authorization,” found that starting in 2003 the Legislature through inaction let Richardson determine how $61 million received under the Jobs Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act should be spent.

He gave $370,000 to his own office, $225,000 to the office of Lt. Governor Diane Denish, $2 million to the Rail Runner, $500,000 to his office of Natural Resources Trustee, and millions more to an assortment of recipients and projects determined by him. Those expenditures were made for vague purposes and without accountability. For instance, the grant to the Lt. Governor was for something described no more specifically than “various projects.”

The Governor has asserted control over $53.9 million received under the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009, known the “stimulus bill.” He vetoed legislation asserting the Legislature’s power to appropriate these funds. Unless the Legislature acts quickly, he will shortly spend these funds without Legislative oversight.

A recent decision by the South Carolina Supreme Court upheld the state legislative authority to allocate funds and rejected arguments similar to those made by Richardson. Litigation may be the only way the Legislature can avoid again abdicating its constitutional powers over appropriations to an aggressive governor. The full report is available here.

In case you missed it or were unable to attend the New Mexico Turnaround conference this weekend, you really missed out on a fantastic event. Check back to this blog for more video highlights from the event, but first and foremost, check out this funny and informative talk by syndicated columnist Jonah Goldberg (the video appears in two parts below):

In case you missed it or were not able to attend, syndicated columnist Jonah Goldberg spoke at the New Mexico Turnaround conference which was held on Friday and Saturday the 18th and 19th of September. The video appears in two parts below:

If you care about making sure we’re not dependent on foreign countries for our energy – and that we don’t continue to hamstring our economy, jobs and revenue stream – American Solutions has a very timely call to action that will take you less than 1 minute. But you need to act now. The deadline for comments is tomorrow.

The Department of Interior, which decides when and where we drill for oil and gas, has been holding a “notice and comment” period. This is when they solicit input from the public as to whether we should drill or not.

This is one way that the anti-energy interest groups have been able to successfully block any common sense development for decades.

The deadline for submissions is Monday, and we need your help to overwhelm the Interior Department with comments in favor of drilling.

Please take 1 minute to submit your comments right now at YourEnergyOpinion.com.

If you don’t have time to write anything, don’t worry. We’ve already taken care of it for you. Just fill in the personal information section, and click “submit.” But feel free to modify the message, or add your own comments at the end. (My standard text and personal comments are pasted in below.)

Once you submit your comment, please forward YourEnergyOpinion.com to anyone else that you think would be willing to help out.

This is an opportunity that we must seize.

University of New Mexico economics professor Micha Gisser has some straight-forward solutions for the nation’s health care problems. Simply put, increased reliance on market forces will bring costs down and improve quality. The article which appeared earlier this week in the Albuquerque Journal is available here.

Since 2003, Governor Bill Richardson has been usurping the constitional power of the Legislature to determine how funds are spent from the state treasury. Because the Legislature failed to act quickly enough, he asserted control over $61 million of unallocated federal funds received under the 2003 Jobs Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act. Without legislative authorizaton, he gave his office $370,000. He gave $225,000 to the Lt. Governor for “various projects” and $500,000 to the Natural Resources Trustee for “environmental studies.” The Rail Runner got a cool $2 million. Local governments and projects of his choosing received millions.

Under the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009, the treasury has received $53.6 million in unallocated funds. The Legislature asserted its constituional power over these funds byalmost unanimous vote. Richardson pocket-vetoed the legislation.

A recent ruling from the South Carolina Supreme Court, however, upheld the legislature’s ultimate power to appropriate these sorts of federal funds. If it cannot overturn the Governor’s veto, litigation may be the only way for the Legislature to avoid abdicating its power over spending to an aggressive Governor.

The full report is available here.

Recently, I sat down with Channel 13 to discuss the 1/4 cent transportation tax that is on Albuquerque ballots in this fall’s municipal election (taking place now). Footage of the story is available here. Also, the Mayor’s streetcar proposal landed on the front page of the Albuquerque Journal again this week due to a disagreement between Mayor Chavez and RJ Berry over whether to call the project a “trolley” or “modern streetcar.”

Regardless of what you call it, the position expressed by Chavez in the article and on his Rio Grande Foundation candidate survey that “the streetcar is not on the ballot in this election” is absurd on its face. After all, a government takeover of America’s health care system was not on the ballot this past fall, but most of us understood that voters who supported Obama for President were endorsing that. Similarly, a vote for Martin Chavez is an implicit endorsement of his proposals including the trolley/streetcar and arena.

This coming Friday and Saturday will see the start of what will hopefully be an annual conference. The even, which is being held in Albuquerque is called “New Mexico Turnaround Conference.” The schedule which is not completely filled in yet, can be found here. I will be on a panel, and if that is not enough reason to attend (ha, ha), so will nationally-syndicated columnist Jonah Goldberg, Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund, and representatives of the Heritage Foundation.

Topics discussed at the conference will include: Education; Energy; Healthcare; Political Corruption; Voter Fraud; The States Use of it’s Resources and the State’s Impact on the Economy; The Purposes of Government as Envisioned by the Founders; and the Threat from the Left.

To RSVP or for questions, please contact Renee Rosales at
(505) 242-2050 or adelantenow@ymail.com or register online at:
www.nmturnaround.com/conference.htm

The conference will be held at:
Hotel Albuquerque at Old Town
800 Rio Grande Blvd. NW
Albuquerque, NM 87104

Early voting starts today and runs through October 2nd. Details on locations etc. are available here. Remember, one vote, especially in a low-turnout election like this one, can have a far greater impact than voting in national elections (I recommend you do both). There is a 1/4-cent tax cut on the ballot that would significantly help Albuquerque taxpayers and businesses in the current, tough economic climate.

Secondly, I found the Mayor’s double-talk on the streetcar/trolley system in today’s ABQ Journal that he has been such a staunch supporter of to be quite interesting. He is distancing himself from the project due to the election while at the same time he likes to talk about how all of our neighbors and other cities are building similar systems. Sure, the streetcar is not on the ballot, but Mayor Marty is and he’s made it clear that he wants one. There is no real guarantee that the project will go to the voters, so voters should consider Marty’s support for the trolley in making their decision.

If you want to find out more about the mayoral candidates, the Albuquerque Alibi is sponsoring a debate tonight that’s free and open to the public. Details follow:

“The Line” host Gene Grant, KUNM’s News Director Jim Williams, New Mexico Independent Editor Gwyneth Doland and I will moderate. We’ll pose your burning questions about your city to the candidates.

Audience members will be given notecards and can submit their queries at the start of the throwdown. Or, film a question, upload it to YouTube and send the link to abqmayoraldebate@gmail.com. (Extra points if your backdrop relates to the subject of your question.)

R.J. Berry, Martin Chavez, Richard Romero
Submit video questions for candidates to abqmayoraldebate@gmail.com
See what people are already asking at youtube.com/user/DebateHosts
Wednesday, Sept. 16
National Hispanic Cultural Center
1710 Fourth Street NW
Doors open at 6 p.m., debate at 7 p.m.
Seating is first-come, first-served. About 300 available.
Hear it live on KUNM 89.9 FM
Watch it and live-blog it at alibi.com and newmexicoindependent.com
See it Friday, Sept. 18, on KNME-5

After the mayoral debate, join Alibi and local politicos for discourse, libations and complimentary canapés. Municipal DJs play eclectic Americana and rare groove as citizens of Albuquerque snack and mingle.
Downtown at Blackbird Buvette (509 Central), Wednesday, Sept. 16, from 8:30 p.m. 21+

On Speaking Freely this past Saturday (listen here), Jim and I covered both the national tea party taking place in Washington and the tea party in Santa Fe. Then, we discussed the US Constitution with New Mexico Rep. Dennis Roch who has introduced a resolution re-asserting our rights under the 10th amendment.

Dr. Brian Jellison, a neuroradiologist from Santa Fe had an interesting critique of Obamacare and the Congressional authors of health care reform. In the article, which appeared in the Albuquerque Journal, Jellison critiqued the backgrounds of Reps. John Dingell, Charlie Rangel, and Henry Waxman and their lack of health care credentials. He goes on to make some very good points about the plan moving through Congress and the lack of incentives built into it, but I want to address the issue of doctors and health policy first. On this front I have some disagreements with Dr. Jellison.

Certainly, the opinions of professional experts whether they be doctors, educators, or truck drivers, should be taken into account, but the fact is that all of these areas, be it health care, education, or transportation are no longer left to the professionals because of massive government intervention. Regardless of one’s professional pedigree, politics now predominates much of our daily lives. It doesn’t take a doctor to understand that government needs to get out of health care (and many doctors, unfortunately, believe that government’s role should be expanded dramatically). In fact, most of our problems in health care, education, and transportation are the result of government policies, not professional incompetence.

Hopefully, Dr. Jellison and other free market doctors, rather than shrinking the size of the pro-market tent, will focus on the real problem, that is government policies, rather than focusing on the credentials of who is making the policies. After all, Howard Dean is a doctor.