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.
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.
Soon, Albuquerque voters will be asked whether or not to permanently extend the 1/4 cent transportation tax that has been in place for 10 years and is set to expire. I discussed the reasons why this might not be such a good idea in an opinion piece in today’s Albuquerque Journal.
For starters, a 1/4 cent gross receipts tax hike is not the same as the equivalent sales tax;
Voters are being asked to make this tax permanent. Why not another 10 years at most?
41 percent of the revenues will be allocated to transit and bikes, far in excess of their actual market share when it comes to moving people around town. Why the over-investment in those modes?
The problem with government regulating every facet of the US economy is that invariably, politicians are swayed by the electoral or campaign-donation-making power of the various interests at play, not the merits of the arguments on either side. This scenario is currently being played out in a struggle between shipping giants FedEx and UPS.
George Will had an excellent piece about the situation several weeks ago. Basically, UPS wants to hamstring its main competitor FedEx by forcing it to adhere to stricter labor laws that give more power to the labor unions. This despite the fact that in the early 1990s, Fedex actually attempted to convince Congress to give UPS the ability to operate under the same rules under which FedEx operates.
Unfortunately, the House of Representatives has already passed the “bailout” of Big Brown. It is up to the Senate to stop this unwise and unnecessary legislation. In fact, rather than forcing more labor regulations on UPS, Congress would be providing the US economy a real stimulus if it reduced the ability of labor unions to tie up not only these, but other businesses attempting to get by in today’s economy.
Oh, and while we’re on the issue of shipping companies, as my friend Paul Jacob writes, now is the time to privatize the US Post Office as well!
The following is a list of the top five fibs contained in President Obama’s health care speech last night. Link is available here.
1. Middle class tax hikes: “The middle class will realize greater [health] security, not higher taxes.”
This would be a big departure from the House bill and the Baucus draft. The House bill has four tax increases on families making less than $250,000. President Obama himself endorsed another when he called for an individual mandate with a tax penalty. Earlier this week, he again floated the idea of a “soda tax.” The Baucus draft, like the House bill, contains a new tax on over-the-counter medicines purchased with an FSA or HSA
2. Individual mandate tax: “Under my plan, individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance.”
What the President is not saying is that the “stick” forcing individuals to do this will be a tax increase. In the House bill, the tax penalty would be 2.5 percent of income. Under the Baucus draft, the tax would range from $750 to $3800, based on family size and income. Either way, it’s a new tax.
3. Deficit-neutral is not tax-neutral: “I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits—either now, or in the future. Period.”
All “deficit-neutral” means is that taxes will go up at least as much as spending goes up. Under any version of government healthcare, taxes needed to make the plans deficit-neutral would easily exceed $200 billion per year once the plans are fully phased in, according to CBO estimates.
4. Tax code makes healthcare more expensive: “We spend one-and-a-half times more per person on health care than any other country, but we aren’t any healthier for it. This is one of the reasons that insurance premiums have gone up three times faster than wages.”
One of the reasons healthcare inflation is 8 percent a year, while regular inflation is 3 percent a year, is because of the tax code. The tax code prevents most individuals from buying health insurance with pre-tax dollars. Only when insurance is obtained through one’s job or the government is there a tax benefit. There’s also almost no tax benefit to paying for medical expenses out of pocket. These combine to make people think that someone else—not they—are paying for their health care, which drives up the cost.
5. Tax cuts don’t “cost” money: “The plan I’m proposing will cost around $900 billion over ten years…less than the tax cuts for the wealthiest few Americans that Congress passed at the beginning of the previous administration.”
To make an obvious point, taxes are not the government’s money. They are money taken by force of law from the American people. To cut taxes doesn’t “cost” any family anything. In fact, it saves them money. When taxes are raised to increase government spending, that does cost money for families.
Today, on 09-09-09, the Rio Grande Foundation launched a new club called “The Nine Club.” While we understand that blogging is relatively cheap based on the technologies that are now currently available, but that is only one small part of what we do. Check out The 9 Club as unique and fun way to get more involved in supporting the many efforts on behalf of individual liberty and personal responsibility that are undertaken by the Rio Grande Foundation on a regular basis. The 9 Club can be found here. Check it out!
This week, Jim and I discussed the science and policy of global warming including cap-and-trade and carbon taxes with John Fleck, science reporter with the Albuquerque Journal. The show can be found here.
The Rio Grande Foundation, New Mexico Prosperity Project, and CARE invite you to a presentation and discussion: The Impact of Climate Change Legislation on the Economy of New Mexico and the Southwest with guest speaker Dr. Margo Thorning Senior VP and Chief Economist at the American Council for Capital Formation.
The event will be held on Thursday, September 10, 2009 from 5:45PM to 7:00PM in the Taos Room at the Marriott Pyramid Hotel in Albuquerque, NM.
The $15 price of admission includes discussion, complimentary appetizers, and a no-host bar. RSVP: rdozierottennmp2@comcast.net or call 505-856-7244.
Dr. Thorning will present trends in global energy use and carbon emissions and look at the macroeconomic impact of the Waxman-Markey climate change legislation with respect to GDP, employment, energy prices and annual wages. In addition, Dr. Thorning will suggest a number of practical strategies for reducing global greenhouse growth.
About Dr. Thorning: Margo Thorning is senior vice president and chief economist with the American Council for Capital Formation (ACCF) and director of research for its public policy think tank. Dr. Thorning also serves as the managing director of the International Council for Capital Formation, a new think tank incorporated in Brussels. The ICCF is an affiliate of the ACCF. Dr. Thorning is an internationally recognized expert on tax, environmental, and competitiveness issues. She writes and lectures on tax and economic policy, is frequently quoted in publications such as the Financial Times, Suddeutsche Zeitung, New York Times, and Wall Street Journal, and has appeared internationally on public affairs news programs.
Too often when describing the size and scope of the United States government, we use massive numbers that are not relevant to regular people in their daily lives. The Center for Individual Freedom has produced an excellent video (below) to illustrate the problem and how government-run medical reforms now moving through Congress would affect average families.
While the health care debate has been focused on President Obama and Congress for the last several months, each state still has a great deal to say about health care spending within its borders. Nowhere is this more the case than in Medicaid. As I point out in my new opinion piece, “Trimming the New Mexico Budget,” New Mexico could reduce its budget deficit and improve its Medicaid system by targeting the long term care program within Medicaid for significant savings and giving low income recipients greater control over the resources given them under Medicaid.
Albuquerque Dr. Barry Krakow hits the nail on the head in his excellent opinion piece in the Albuquerque Journal. And I’m not saying this just because he mentions my advocacy for such “consumerist” behavior in the health care sector at Rep. Martin Heinrich’s health care town hall meeting.
Writes Krakow in a passage that sums up his argument:
Some of us, including doctors who provide these services, may forget health care is a service with a cost, a profit margin and a price to pay. Politicians and others imagine insurance as a right or benefit owed to citizens. Only politicians can enact such legislation, but the fact remains — health care is first and always a service.
Unlike health-care services, the real world marketplace suffers no confusion about costs, profits and sale prices. You pay for food at a grocery that stocks the food you want and can afford; you don’t ask the cashier “what’s my copay?” or “will my deductible cover it?”
September has already been a busy month here at the Rio Grande Foundation. Although I won’t personally be making my way to Washington, the Rio Grande Foundation has signed on in support of the 9/12 March on Washington. If you have the time and ability to take the anti-tax, pro-liberty message to Washington, you are encouraged to do so. More information is available about the 9/12 event here.
In case you missed it (or you attended and want to share it with your friends), footage of the recent health care debate between Michael Cannon of the Cato Institute and Carter Bundy of the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees. In addition to the footage which can be found below, Cannon and Bundy debated again, but this time on air with 770 KKOB radio host Bob Clark moderating. The audio is not available yet, but check back in a few days.