Wisconsin Republican Congressman Paul Ryan has made something of a splash among fiscal conservatives with a plan to bring America’s fiscal picture back into balance. His plan, which has been embraced by many conservatives, but not necessarily most Republicans, is called “A Roadmap for America’s Future.” It is one of, if not the only serious, numbers on paper, ideas for pulling the US federal budget out of its current tailspin. It should be noted that Democrats haven’t put together a real plan for balancing America’s long-term budget either.

While Ryan’s efforts should be applauded by anyone concerned about America’s future, as Reason Magazine points out “Ryan voted in favor of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), the widely despised bank bailout. He also endorsed the taxpayer-funded auto bailout, citing ‘mounting hardships’ in a part of his state once dominated by carmakers. His ballyhooed spending plan is so incrementalist that it wouldn’t balance the budget until 2063. And this year, while defending his policies to The New York Times, the congressman declared, ‘I’m not trying to win an award from the Cato Institute.’”

With all that said, Ryan has at least started a debate with his “Roadmap.” If Republicans are going to gain control of Congress anytime soon, they need to seriously consider making some of the tough choices Ryan outlines (and perhaps coming up with some that he fails to consider, like reducing defense outlays).

Tax lightning is still striking New Mexico property owners. One of the problems associated with tax lightning is the convoluted way in which property is assessed and thus taxed in New Mexico.

Our own Micha Gisser, professor emeritus at UNM, wrote in the Albuquerque Journal about one component of the solution, that is, returning assessments to market values. This more logical system, as outlined by Gisser, would operate along the following model:

The market values of all homes are estimated as frequently as reasonably possible. By law, the assessed values of all homes are set equal to their estimated market values. The property-tax rate is by law defined as the ratio of the total required revenue to the aggregate estimated market values of all homes.

This sounds like a good system moving forward, but I’d like your comments.

In case you’ve been out of the country, you are probably already aware that the 2010 elections this November are very important to New Mexico’s future. Before we get to November, however, there is a primary on June 1 and early voting is going on right now.

In order to help decide who they want to vote for in November, the Rio Grande Foundation (along with KOB Channel 4) is holding a televised gubernatorial candidate debate to be attended by all five candidates.

This debate will be held on May 27th from 7:00 to 8:00PM and will be televised live on KOB Channel 4 from Rodey Hall on the campus of the University of New Mexico. We are extremely pleased that all five Republican candidates have accepted the invitation to participate.

As you might imagine, putting together an event of this size and importance costs money. Our expected outlay for this event will be just over $2,000. This amount will pay for an auditorium, staging, and a variety of other important things that go into this once-in-a-campaign opportunity.

Please support this history-in-the-making opportunity and help the Rio Grande Foundation by donating at least $20.00 by no later than Sunday, May 23rd. You can donate safely and securely online. And, as a thank you for your donation, we will have two tickets waiting for you at the door on debate night!

We hope you will support this event with a generous donation, even more than $20, and in return we will provide you with additional tickets to this once-in-a-lifetime event. And don’t forget, if you will not be able to attend the debate, you can still show your support by making a donation today!

You can mail your donation to Rio Grande Foundation, P.O. Box 40336, Albuquerque, NM 87196, or, as mentioned, online at our secure site. Or if you are more comfortable with “offline” communication, please give us a call us at 505-264-6090 and we will be happy to take your credit card information over the phone.

Please donate on or before May 23rd so we can be sure to reserve tickets for you! Tickets are limited and on a first-come, first-served basis, so we urge you to donate early and generously!

We, at the Rio Grande Foundation, are working hard to continue our efforts to make the public aware of who the candidates for Governor of New Mexico are and what they stand for.

That was the question this week at the Independent Forum. Martha Burk, thankfully not Richardson’s economic advisor, seems to think that only government can create jobs. Responses from the more rational panelists can also be found, including, not surprisingly, a rather lengthy response from yours truly (the final one).

I do wonder, however, where are the postings from the liberal lions like Carter Bundy or Jim Baca (former Albuquerque Mayor!!!), or Arthur Alpert? Surely they have some thoughts on how to create jobs (or are their views the same as Burk’s which is, expand government?)

As always, please add your own $.02 at the Forum.

I am NOT a scientist, but like just about every other American, I am concerned about the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, but from an environmental and a public policy perspective (check out the recent Independent Forum for more details). Up til now it has seemed like no real solutions to the spill are available.

So, it was nice to see this video which was sent to me by RGF supporter Jack Stamm of Santa Fe. Who knows? Certainly hay is cheap and biodegradable….

There was a lot going on last week when transportation expert Randal O’Toole spoke at a Rio Grande Foundation event in Albuquerque on May 6th. So, if you did not get to come out to hear what O’Toole had to say, here is the next best thing. O’Toole’s presentation is online at Youtube below:

His powerpoint presentation can be found online here.

During that state’s 2010 legislative session Arizona lawmakers enacted some of the most far-reaching K-12 education reforms in state history. The changes have received little attention from any Arizona media so far. But you can bet you’ll hear much more as the state implements the new laws.

I’m betting that Arizona students will benefit greatly from these reforms in terms of improved test scores and rising graduation rates. If New Mexico’s political leadership enacted the same reforms, perhaps the Land of Enchantment could see some improvement as well? As Dr. Matthew Ladner of the Arizona-based Goldwater Institute writes:

Ten years ago Florida implemented a set of education reforms that transformed their schools from among the worst performers on national tests to among the best. Several of the bills that Governor Brewer has signed into law are modeled on Florida’s success.

1) Arizona now will annually issue schools a letter grade of A, B, C, D, or F.

2) The state now will have a robust program for experts in math, science and other areas to teach their subjects without first getting a teaching certificate from a college of education.

3) Lawmakers have curtailed social promotion by holding back some third graders who have yet to learn the basics of reading.

4) Legislators expanded the sources available to launch new charter schools.

5) Lawmakers increased the size and transparency of the state scholarship tax credit program and changed to the date for claiming the tax credits from December 31 to April 15.

6) The Legislature also specified school districts cannot use “years on the job” as the only criteria when deciding which teachers to keep. The Arizona Department of Education will be required to develop teacher and principal evaluations that include how well students score on specific tests.

Each bill contains important policy changes that will improve education by holding educators accountable to parents and taxpayers. The “A” to “F” school labels and teacher evaluation reforms could revolutionize Arizona’s public schools if properly implemented.

This year, Arizona lawmakers demonstrated with action, not just words, that they will not accept Arizona permanently sitting near the bottom of student achievement rankings. We will not see overnight improvement, and much hard work lies ahead. We have, however, taken the first vital steps to turning our school performance crisis around.

For more on Florida’s successful education reforms, check out Ladner’s presentation comparing Florida and New Mexico here.

The Albuquerque Business Journal profiled me in today’s paper. You can find out more about me than you probably want to know.

One of the RGF’s supporters did mention something they would like to see, that is, me do some kind of public speaking either for RGF or for other organizations, about my transition from a left-wing liberal to a free market conservative. If this is something that you’d like to have me speak about at an RGF event, or at a function put on by your group, please leave a comment along these lines or shoot us an email at: info@riograndefoundation.org

Everyone comes from a different direction in terms of their political leanings. I was certainly not born a libertarian. If you want to find out more about what a libertarian is, check out John Stossel’s recent program on “What is a Libertarian?” You can also meet Deroy Murdock, our upcoming keynote speaker.

Sometimes a visual representation does it better than a pile of numbers on paper. Check out this poster which visually represents the federal budget. Notably, even this visual representation of the complex and ever-growing federal budget, now $1.5 trillion, is an enlightening and interesting look at just how Uncle Sam spends all those tax dollars we give them.

Whatever else may be said about the budget, there is no doubt that it is too big. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that over the next decade, the national debt would increase more than $12 trillion if Obama gets his way. By the end of 2020, the total debt would be more than $20 trillion, or 90 percent of the country’s GDP. Indeed, in that year alone, just the interest payment to service the debt would cost taxpayers $925 billion.

Lost among all the debate in Washington over the stalled financial reform legislation has been any discussion about the major role of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (which I have previously commented on) in the banking collapse.

Now, according to the Wall Street Journal, it looks like there is a push by John McCain (R-AZ), Richard Shelby (R-AL), and Judd Gregg (R-NH) is to put the mortgage giants on the table for reform. It is about time. After all, as the article points out “The duo are by far the biggest losers of the entire financial panic—bigger than AIG, Citigroup and the rest.”

McCain and Shelby are pushing to make several, long-overdue reforms part of any financial reform package:

The amendment mandates that the current government conservatorship of Fan and Fred will end within 30 months. In the meantime, the companies will have to reduce their mortgage portfolios by 10% each year. If the terrible twosome can’t stand on their own after conservatorship, they would then go into receivership and be liquidated.

If they can survive on their own, they would have three years before the expiration of their federal charters, during which time they would have new operating restrictions. Messrs. McCain, Shelby and Gregg would repeal the affordable housing goals previously legislated for Fan and Fred and which contributed to their terrible mortgage bets, and the companies would have to reduce the mortgage assets held on their books by nearly 50% within two years and raise their capital standards.

Fannie and Freddie would also have to start paying state and local sales taxes, lose their exemption from full registration at the Securities and Exchange Commission when they issue securities, and start paying fees to repay the taxpayer for the value of federal guarantees. The $400 billion limit on taxpayer assistance would be reinstated, and for as long as they are in federal conservatorship or receivership, they would have to be included in the federal budget.

This type of reform should be a significant part of any financial reform. Only time will tell if the Obama Administration is serious about preventing the next economic crisis or not.

You know you’re making an impact when someone feels the need to set up a website for the sole purpose of opposing you. After more than four years of working on behalf of personal liberty for the Rio Grande Foundation, I am pleased that the folks at RGF Watch have arrived on the scene for the sole purpose of telling their readers how evil and influential we are.

Of course, we’re not going anywhere, so I look forward to a lot of Watchdogging by the folks (or person) over at RGF Watch. It is good to keep people honest and point out places where their logic falls short. For example, yes, I’ve written about Texas favorably, but that’s because Texas is one of the most economically-free states (check page 4) in the nation. That has led Texas to have significantly-higher income levels than New Mexico.

Randal O’Toole’s ideas stand for themselves, read his most recent book and decide for yourself.

I could go on, but I won’t. I’ll let the folks at RGF Watch use their website to critique our work and we’ll have a fun, if not always friendly, debate.

I already have laid out my brief thoughts on the recent, substantial rate hikes on New Mexicans in the individual health insurance market. Because of the importance of the health care issue to the state and the nation, I decided to expound a bit more on the problem of rising health insurance costs and health care inflation more generally.

The article appeared today in the Deming Headlight. Check it out. I explain why President Obama’s health care plan is destined to fail.

As an aside, I recently received my health savings account statement. I now have more than $6,500 saved in the account after just four years in possession of the account. How much money have you saved through your insurance policy to put aside for YOUR future health care costs?

This week’s question over at the New Mexico Independent Forum is one of the more difficult ones I’ve faced as a panelist on that forum. The issue that we’re all dealing with is the massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. You can read my response here. Of course, the liberal panelists view the oil and gas industries as unmitigated evil-doers, bent on plundering the environment for as much loot as they can pocket.

The truth is that oil and gas are essential to the US economy and we all benefit from them — even the left-wing enviros –but the unfortunate fact is that deep water drilling is obviously not perfect technology.

The other issue surrounding the oil spill that it is somehow a vindication of “big government.” While use of the military to help clean up the oil spill in the Gulf is certainly a worthy role for government, it hardly justifies the rapid growth of the federal government.

In case you missed the Channel 13 news at 10pm, here is an excellent story for which I was interviewed. The story details the very generous government perk received by City employees who leave the bureaucracy for whatever reason and have built up a great deal of sick and vacation time.

A few important aspects of the story include:

1) According to Christine Trujillo the AFL-CIO, City employees “donate a lot of time and energy to their jobs;”
2) No one in the private sector receives such a generous payout (if they receive anything) for their unused sick or vacation time;
3) Government workers in New Mexico, including City workers, are paid as well or better than their peers in the private sector. Check out our study here. According to our data which is taken from federal numbers, state and local government workers in New Mexico earn 11.5 percent more than those in the private sector in terms of total compensation for their work.

What kind of an outfit presenting a $500 million letter of credit has its “corporate offices” in a UPS store on the west side of Sin City?  The kind of outfit that is part of the team behind the effort to get Rio Rancho to issue half a billion in industrial revenue bonds to launch solar start-up Green2v.  Eclipse Aviation on steroids?  There are some mighty strange things in this story we report at New Mexico Watchdog.

If you follow the work of the Rio Grande Foundation closely, you might be amazed at the amount of work we do and the impact we’re having on public policy debates in New Mexico. In particular, this involves getting the pro-liberty, limited government message out in a place (New Mexico) that is in desperate need of it. Far be it from me to toot our own horn, but I don’t think there is another organization anywhere near our size that has as dramatic an impact on public policy debates. Just ask the paranoid liberals over at Albuquerque Journal Watch who said this recently “The Rio Grande Foundation’s unannounced reign over the Albuquerque Journal’s op-ed page continues unabated.”

Why is that? Well, I’d like to take all the credit or at least share it between myself and other employees, but it isn’t just us. Think tanks are really great vehicles for policy change. Read more about why that is true in this excellent article. Oh, and if you support our work and want to help us, please consider making a donation here.

Free trade works. If you don’t believe it, John Stossel’s most recent show explained its benefits nicely.

In fact, one of the greatest (under-appreciated) achievements of the US Constitution was that it set up a free trade area in the US that now contains a total of 50 states. Unfortunately, in Construction, as I read in today’s Albuquerque Journal, there is a web of preferences (barriers to free trade) that has been erected in order to improve the prospects of supposedly New Mexico-based construction companies in receiving public construction projects in the state. Other states have similar laws.

The reason for all the coverage in today’s paper is that New Mexico’s law is too easy to circumvent and that out-of-state construction companies are winnning projects and taking business away from New Mexico-firms. Sen. Tim Keller wants to strengthen New Mexico’s laws to more strongly favor New Mexico companies.

I don’t get it. In-state favoritism is bad policy and New Mexico, rather than attempting to further favor in-state contractors, should work with other states to abolish these bad laws. After all, it is ultimately taxpayers that lose out from this kind of trade war. If an out-of-state company can do the job better and/or cheaper (thus winning the firm the project), we’d be foolish not to hire them to do the job. As for New Mexico-based construction workers, it would seem that even out-of-state companies doing projects here would want to hire local workers rather than bearing the costs of importing out-of-state workers.

Some, talking heads, especially on the left, have been calling the bailout of General Motors a bailout “success story.” Said, Bill Press on the occasion of GM supposedly paying back its federal loan, “Time for all the nay-sayers to admit they were wrong. Say it loud and clear: No doubt about it, the auto industry bail-out worked!”

But is that the real story? Of course not! As Shikha Dalmia of Reason explains in her excellent Forbes column, the amount given to GM by the Obama Administration is far greater than GM and its advocates recognize and the company is still a very long way from paying this debt back.

Of course, there is the small moral issue of forcibly taking my money and giving it to a private business, but that is so commonplace these days…

The Rio Grande Foundation is working with America Speaks , a non-partisan organization that attempts to spur dialogue on the most important issues of the day. You are cordially invited to participate in an unprecedented National Town Meeting to discuss our budget and our economy

On Saturday, June 26, 2010, thousands of Americans across the country will join together in a National Town Meeting to discuss the fiscal future of our country. Albuquerque is one of the six primary locations across the country where participants will be connected via satellite video, webcast and interactive technologies. Additional smaller gatherings and discussions will take place simultaneously in other cities across the nation and those locations too will be connected to the primary sites via webcast and interactive technologies.

In Albuquerque we will begin this historic Town Meeting at 9:30 am and the meeting will run to 4:00 pm.

We will meet at the Albuquerque Convention Center, 401 2nd Street NW, Ballroom A

We invite you to join the discussion.

Register now
To participate, you must register.

There is no fee to register and lunch and snacks will be provided free. Where possible, childcare, transportation assistance and translation services will be provided. The Albuquerque Convention Center is ADA accessible.

To register
Log on to: http://usabudgetdiscussion.org Click on “Participate” found at the top of the page.
On your right, in the vertical menu, under “Join the Discussion” click on Albuquerque. This will open up the Registration form. Complete and submit the Registration form.

You can also register by calling toll-free at 866-755-6263
Space is limited so register now !

Your voice will be heard !
Participants in the Town Meeting will reflect the political, socio-economic, and ethnic diversity of the United States. After June 26, AmericaSpeaks will present the priorities that emerge from the National Town Meeting to Congress and President Obama, as well as the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform and the Bi-Partisan Policy Center’s Debt Reduction Task Force. The results that emerge from the discussion will have credibility with policy makers because they will reflect the authentic views of a large, informed, and representative group of Americans. The discussion will not be manipulated by any side or point of view, and will give the American public a real chance to find common ground.

For additional information, visit the America Speaks website at: http://usabudgetdiscussion.org or email Mikki Anaya, Albuquerque Site Manager at: manaya@americspeaks.org

Who is AmericaSpeaks? AmericaSpeaks is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization with the mission to reinvigorate American democracy by engaging citizens in the public decision-making that most impacts their lives. Over the past 15 years, we have engaged more than 150,000 people across the country on some of the most pressing issues facing our communities and our nation, including the rebuilding of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, economic development in Northeast Ohio, and creating municipal budget priorities for Washington, DC. We have done so through innovative meetings that integrate authentic deliberation with new kinds of technology.

AmericaSpeaks takes pride in its reputation as an honest and neutral advocate for public participation. We play a unique role in the policymaking process by serving as a non-partisan convener of forums that provide the public with an opportunity to make decisions about important issues without fear of manipulation or bias. Our ability to help citizens and elected officials come together around tough public issues is dependent on our commitment to maintaining this neutral role. We have not and will never take a position on the outcomes of the national discussion.

Carter Bundy with the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), recently attacked the Rio Grande Foundation on NMPolitics.net. The gist of his argument was that we at the Rio Grande Foundation are not seriously engaged in solving New Mexico’s public policy issues and that we are just “out to get” government workers because of the problems that have occurred in the private sector.

Well, there is a lot of meat on that bone, so to speak. Government workers have a lot at stake in terms of growing government. I respond to Bundy and make a number of points of my own. Check it out over at NMPolitics.net. And, if you like what you read, please leave a comment!

I just love how advocates for massively-subsidized transit will obfuscate reality and throw up smokescreens in order to defend their favorite boondoggles. A case in point is the article in today’s Albuquerque Journal by Ike Benton and Chris Blewett. The article is downright silly in so many of its statements in response to Mark Mathis’s recent, excellent column on stopping the Rail Runner that it almost doesn’t deserve a response, but the issue is sufficiently controversial, that I’ll respond below. In the meantime, if you want to find out more about the ways in which transit advocates attempt to sell these projects, regardless of their impact on taxpayers, attend our meeting with transportation expert Randal O’Toole on Thursday, May 6.

First and foremost, regardless of the exact costs of construction, both sides agree that the Rail Runner cost in excess of $400 million to build. 100% of this money comes out of taxpayers’ pockets. This is a huge expense that Benton and Blewett do not honestly account for. After all, a highway lane would be paid for by gas taxes (a user-fee paid by motorists);

Then, Benton and Blewett make the argument that the “real” congestion problem is not BETWEEN Albuquerque and Santa Fe, but WITHIN the two cities. Fair enough. So, why would we build a commuter rail train (the RailRunner) between the two cities? After all, the Rail Runner only has only three stops within each city. The train runs for more than 100 miles between Belen and Bernalillo. Why didn’t we spend the money — far less would be necessary — on bus rapid transit or something that will actually target our “real” congestion issues?

Then, there is the issue of other cities and their rail boondoggles. Benton and Blewett imply that it is inevitable that cities embark on these projects at some point in the future. The fact is that the rail projects in these other cities are every bit as wasteful and unnecessary as the Rail Runner. Unfortunately, there is a transit lobbying interest that holds a great deal of sway in pushing these projects forward. If you want to find out more about this transit lobby (and arm yourself with ways to stop it), I cannot stress how important Randal O’Toole’s presentation is.

This week’s question at the New Mexico Independent Forum centered around Blue Cross Blue Shield New Mexico and its recent efforts to raise rates on individual policies relatively dramatically (in excess of 20% this year). As a policyholder with Blue Cross, I am impacted directly by this, but unlike government from which we all should demand close to 100% transparency, I don’t think hearings are the best way to decide whether an insurance company can or should raise prices.

The real issue at hand here is the need for federal market-based health care reforms and some at the state level here in New Mexico as well. In a competitive, market-based health care market (like car insurance), there would be no need for an elaborate, inefficient, and costly hearing system. Unfortunately, that is not what we have and ObamaCare is not a step in the right direction.

Over the weekend the Kerry/Graham/Lieberman Climate Change Legislation—commonly known as Cap and Trade—was postponed. It was scheduled to be introduced, but it has been delayed (at least briefly). Supporters were expecting it pass by June or July. Reports now predict that it may not get on the legislative calendar this year.

An article out of Rueters closed with this: “If Congress fails to approve climate legislation this year, it could try again in 2011. If all efforts collapse in Congress, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has said it would begin regulating greenhouse gases for the first time, an outcome business and environmental groups wish to avoid. They prefer legislation tailored to their needs.”

With this in mind, now is the opportune time for opposition to U.S. EPA’s plans to be heard. Our friends over at the Citizens Alliance for Responsible Energy are looking for business owners, trade associations, and corporations who are willing to sign the letter below which will be sent to Senators Udall and Bingaman. To participate, we need a scan of your signature, a jpg of your logo and how you want to be listed (such as: Marita K. Noon, Executive Director, Citizens’ Alliance for Responsible Energy).

If you receive this invitation to participate, but are not a business owner, a trade association representative, or corporate spokesperson, please forward this to anyone you know who fits this profile.

We need to strike while the iron is hot. Ideally, we will get this letter out by the end of this week. If you have questions about the U.S. EPA’s decision to regulate greenhouse gases using the Clean Air Act, please contact Marita at Marita@responsiblenergy.org or 505.239.8998.

Here is the letter:

(List of businesses and groups) collectively write to urge you to support the Murkowski resolution prohibiting the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) from regulating greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act (CAA). Your support of this resolution will help save New Mexico’s businesses, jobs, and families.

As you are aware, the U.S. EPA announced last December its intention to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the CAA. U. S. EPA made this announcement despite ongoing efforts on Capitol Hill to address climate change and energy issues.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski has introduced a resolution to prevent the U. S. EPA from regulating greenhouse gases because, she believes, Congress is a more appropriate forum for addressing such major issues that have economy-wide impacts. We agree that this is a matter for Congress, not the U. S. EPA.

While we (the above businesses and organizations) may have a variety of different viewpoints on climate change and energy issues, we all agree that U. S. EPA regulations would be all cap and no trade. This approach would be inflexible and cost prohibitive, thereby hurting New Mexico businesses, workers and families.

The Murkowski resolution is expected to come up for a Senate vote within the next few weeks. We are asking you to declare your support for the Murkowski resolution as soon as possible. The future of New Mexico may depend on this vote.

Please let us know if you need more information or if we can help you otherwise with respect to this vital matter.

The Lt. Governor has no real power. She sits on boards, presides over the Senate, votes in cases of a tie, etc.  But she has a small staff, and no executive powers to direct any part of state government.  Yet, she flew around the state for brief meetings, photo ops and parades.  Sometimes her only passenger in a jet with two pilots (costing us over $1,200 per hour) was her husband.  What’s interesting is the comparison between our Lt. Gov. and the Governor of the entire state of Texas.  That state has five times the land mass of New Mexico, a lot more people and a whole lot more photo opps awaiting.  But Perry uses state aircraft “sparingly” according to a report by Texas Watchdog.  In the period of time they examined, he used state jets only five times, not including eight trips to responed to the Hurricane Ike crisis.  Denish, by comparison, used state planes 26 times, and her use spiked before elections.  We hash it out over at New Mexico Watchdog.