In today’s Albuquerque Journal, economist Micha Gisser (a senior fellow w/ RGF), discusses a few ways in which our health care system might be reformed with an emphasis on both free markets and “universal” health care. The basic idea of Swiss health care is to generally free Americans of some of the most absurd and silly regulations — by allowing, for example, individuals to receive the same tax benefits as their employers do and by purchasing care across state lines — and to demand that each American purchase a very basic plan to cover emergencies.
Gisser makes many good points in his column. Given the choice between the Swiss model and what Obama is proposing, I’d certainly go for the Swiss model. There are a few major questions before we impose the Swiss model here: 1) how do we ensure that everyone has health care and enforce that? After all America is a much bigger, more open society than Switzerland 2) How do we ensure that bureaucrats and politicians don’t demand larger and more ambitious “basic” coverage as happened in Massachusetts with its “connector” plan?

Kudos to our friends at Think New Mexico who achieved a big success in the recently-completed legislative session with the reform of title insurance, a form of insurance that is required when you purchase a home. As Fred Nathan, the head of Think New Mexico, pointed out, until the passage of these reforms, “Only three states in the country allow the government to set prices for the title insurance industry: New Mexico, Texas and Florida. As of 2006, all three states were in the top five for the price of title insurance, according to a 50 state comparison performed by Bankrate.com.”
While the legislation introduces some reforms, it does not create a purely free market. It does, however, move New Mexico in that direction. As Barry Massey of the Associated Press notes:

The state will continue to establish a price for title insurance but insurers can charge a lower rate in a county if it’s approved by the superintendent of insurance, who runs the division of insurance in the Public Regulation Commission.
Regulators also are to provide the public with information about title insurance rates for residential property. A listing of rates on the PRC’s Web site will allow consumers to shop for the best price.
Another provision in the legislation will provide for greater discounts on title insurance policies for homeowners refinancing their loans.

A fiscal impact report containing more information on the legislation is available here. The Governor is apparently going to sign the bill shortly.

From time to time different groups of historians get together and rank the various presidents of the United States. All too often, these rankings simply focus on personal charisma and “effectiveness” in getting their agenda passed, regardless of what that agenda actually entails.
Ivan Eland at the libertarian Independent Institute has his own thoughts on the issue and unlike these other rankings, Eland, in his new book “Recarving Rushmore: Ranking the Presidents on Peace, Prosperity, and Liberty,” he ranks each president through George W. Bush based on their performance in expanding or contracting Americans freedoms.
Some of the “great” presidents in US history defy expectations…John Tyler, Grover Cleveland, and Warren Harding appear towards the top of the list, but Woodrow Wilson, Harry Truman, and even Ronald Reagan perform poorly at preserving peace, prosperity, and liberty for Americans. To check it out for yourself, get the book here and look for Eland to appear on an upcoming “Speaking Freely” show on Saturday mornings on AM 1550 from 9am to 10am.

Okay, if you care about your children and grandchildren, the topic of the federal deficit and our out-of-control government are really depressing topics. Despite that fact, our politicians are spending us into oblivion and we’re responsible because we’ll either have to pay those bills or our currency will be devalued.
Jim Scarantino and I had Ms. Weinberg and one of her associates from the Institute for Truth in Accounting on our radio show, Speaking Freely on Saturday. You can turn in to the podcast of that show here. Ms. Weinberg will be speaking in Albuquerque tonight from 7pm to 8:30pm at the Albuquerque Museum at a free event sponsored by the Rio Grande Foundation. Stop by!
Jim and I discuss the recently-completed 2009 legislative session w/ Sen. Mark Boitano in the second part of the show. If you can’t get enough of me or Ms. Weinberg, we’ll be on Bob Clark’s show from 9am to 9:45 on 770KKOB. Check it out!

The 2009 legislative session is in the books and — particularly compared to recent sessions — this one was relatively successful for both doing good (improved transparency and reforming government pensions) and not doing bad (like raising taxes). I discussed the accomplishments and shortcomings of the session w/ Rep. Janice Arnold-Jones and hosts Nicole Brady and Dennis Domrzalski on Eye on New Mexico this Sunday morning. Check out the 15 minute video here.

This article on Obama’s pouring 8 billion of our taxpayer dollars into “high speed rail” appeared in today’s Albuquerque Journal. The reporter actually does a pretty good job of discussing the very real drawbacks associated with both traditional passenger rail and high speed projects.
The fact is that money is limited and America is not a densely-populated nation. As Randal O’Toole pointed out in his policy paper, “High Speed Rail The Wrong Road for America,” high speed rail is not as big a success as American tourists might think. In fact, despite heavy subsidies for rail and massive taxes on gasoline, rail is losing market share in Europe:

While high-speed rail is convenient for tourists who want to travel through Europe without the expense of renting a car, it has done little to change European travel habits. In 1980, intercity rail accounted for 8.2percent of passenger travel in the EU-15 (the 15 countries that were members of the European Union as of 2000). By 2000, intercity rail had declined to 6.3 percent. Auto driving gained almost exactly the same market share that rails lost in this time period, growing from 76.4 to 78.3 percent. This is a coincidence, as the real challenge to high-speed rail has come from low-cost airlines. Thanks to Europe’s “open skies” policies, domestic air travel increased from 2.5 percent of travel in 1980 to 5.8 percent in 2000. Intercity buses and urban transit both lost shares.

The Rio Grande Foundation released our latest story on the poor record of New Mexico’s State Investment Council this week. The release can be found here and the full story is available here. The story was also covered on Joe Monahan’s blog.
The gist of the story is as follows:

In 2004, at the urging of Governor Bill Richardson, the State Investment Council (SIC) loaned $9 million dollars to Earthstone International. Governor Richardson said he was “encouraged by Earthstone International’s pledge to create high-paying jobs in Doña Ana County.” The problem, Scarantino found, is that Earthstone appears to have used the state’s money to create jobs in Old Mexico and Arkansas instead of New Mexico.
Earthstone orignially pledged to construct a 200,000 square foot plant at Doña Ana County’s Santa Teresa border crossing. At least 200 new jobs were touted. In one report, Andrew Ungerleider, the company’s co-founder, said that plant would be operational within approximately 18 months from when the loan was approved.
In researching Earthstone and the company’s use of the $9 million loan the SIC made on behalf of taxpayers, Scarantino found that Earthstone never built a New Mexico plant. Instead, New Mexicans’ money has helped Earthstone shift money and jobs to Juarez, Mexico and Bentonville, Arkansas. The loan has never been repaid. In fact, it has been converted to an ownership stake in Earthstone itself.

Given this poor track record, it is clear that the SIC is in need of serious reform.

You may not be aware (if you have anything better to do than sit in your living room with the lights out), but Albuquerque is one of hundreds of cities that has signed up to “celebrate” earth hour this Saturday night. According to the Earth Hour website, the idea is to turn off the lights for one hour at 8:30pm. The goal is to “take action” against global warming.
This is one of the silliest ideas ever. Why stop with lights? How about turning off the heat, refrigerators, and not driving? Will the City turn off street lights and traffic lights? Will hospitals turn off their lights and machines? The fact is that electricity and energy usage in general makes our lives better and turning out the lights for an hour every year isn’t going to change that.
Thankfully, I’m not the only one pointing this out. In fact, our friends at the Competitive Enterprise Institute have created “Human Achievement Hour” to be celebrated at the same time during which we are encouraged to “salute the people who keep the lights on and produce the energy that helps make human achievement possible.”
So, if you’d rather sit in the dark this Saturday, no one will stop you, but I’ll be either out with friends enjoying the fruits of capitalism or I’ll be watching the NCAA Tournament on my High Definition television.

Much has been made — and justifiably so — about the massive growth in spending under President Obama. In fact, the Rio Grande Foundation is hosting an event on Tuesday, March 31 from 7pm to 8:30pm at the Albuquerque Museum. The event will be a discussion with the Founder of the Institute for Truth in Accounting and is an attempt to focus additional attention on the problem.
Unfortunately, while Republicans have now come around to Obama’s massive spending, there has been inadequate discussion of exactly how terrible George W. Bush’s record on spending was. More on that here. According to Veronique de Rugy of the Mercatus Center, spending under Bush grew by more than it did under any of the past 6 presidents (including “guns-and-butter” LBJ).
Hopefully, efforts like the Albuquerque Tea Party will not succumb to the sirens’ song to align themselves with Republicans in Washington. If you’re interested in finding out more about whether this is happening, attend the Albuquerque Tea Party on Tax Day April 15. Jim Scarantino and I will be on the air for 4 hours from 3pm to 7pm on AM 1550 broadcasting live from the Tea Party.

So-called “cap and trade” legislation has been in the news a lot recently. After all, President Obama has been talking about imposing such a system — one that would make a carbon tax look simple and fair by comparison — without using the appropriate legislative channels through Congress. Cap and trade would have a devastating impact on America’s economy both in the short and long terms.
Of course, Obama’s plan is not the only economically-harmful proposal out there. The Western Climate Initiative of which New Mexico is a member, imposes cap and trade…unlike Obama’s plan, the WCI has already been enacted and will start to take effect in 2012. Of course, supporters of the WCI argue that there will be no economic harm associated with the cap and trade system and that the members will actually benefit. Fortunately, as the Rio Grande Foundation released to the New Mexico media yesterday, there is an alternative and far more realistic economic analysis by the Beacon Hill Institute.
Among Beacon Hill’s findings are that “New Mexico could lose as many as 4,689 net jobs, $1.2 billion in personal income, and $219 million in per capita disposable income” under the WCI.

From time to time, a sister think tank of the Rio Grande Foundation, the Minnesota-based Center of the American Experiment, holds a symposium inviting free market leaders from across the country like Grover Norquist, John Goodman, and yours truly, to share their views on pressing issues of the day.
Given the current economic unease and massive government intervention in the economy, the most recent symposium explored the issue of “How Can Conservatism Better Allay the Economic Fears of Working-Class and Middle-Class Americans? The symposium is available here.

There is no doubt that AIG seems to be deliberately acting in ways to spur the moral outrage of politicians and taxpayers. If you are not completely familiar with the story as it stands now, click here.
New Mexico’s own Sen. Tom Udall couldn’t resist piling on, but he went a step further by explicitly threatening AIG. As economist Russell Roberts points out:

Udall doesn’t like to see our money going to a bad cause. Unless it’s friends of his. From KFDA in Amarillo:
As part of the $410 billion Omnibus Spending Bill, US Senator Tom Udall says he included over one million dollars for Eastern New Mexico industries.
Over $200 thousand is going to a dairy consortium so they can boost research on improved dairy production.
And more than $950 thousand is going to the Sapphire Energy Algae so that company can create and grow technology that turns the algae into fuel.
Udall says the algae company could create 100 jobs.
Love that word, “could.” Can’t wait to count them.
The Senator does not seem to understand that these two stories conflict with each other. AIG has failed to generate private capital to keep it afloat. It can only stay afloat with my money. AIG can’t raise private capital because it has lost the trust of potential investors. They’re bankrupt and exist only because of the government’s largesse funded by taxpayers. Why would you want to repeat the same mistake with that dairy consortium and Sapphie Energy Algae? If they’re good investments, let private investors take the risk and either reap the reward or lost their money. If they’re bad investments, why am I being forced to pay for them?

To his credit, Udall voted against the original bailout bill, but the point remains that throwing taxpayer money at AIG is not much different from throwing taxpayer money at politically-connected companies that pledge to create jobs. If he and others in Washington (not to mention Santa Fe) understood this, we’d all be in much better shape.
HT: Harry Messenheimer

Despite New Mexico’s status as one of the most corrupt and scandal-plagued in the nation, the Legislature appears likely to miss out on an opportunity to give citizens a chance to see where there taxpayer dollars are going.
The House Tax and Revenue Committee tabled SB 159 yesterday which would have made available to the public an easily accessible, searchable budget database on the Department of Finance and Administration’s website. SB 159 passed the Senate floor unanimously.
“SB 159 was a common sense proposal that would have provided much needed budget awareness of how state government spends a nearly $6 billion operating budget. This transparency is essential to ensuring the people retain confidence in their government. Equally important, budget transparency helps prevent waste, fraud and abuse,” stated Tax and Revenue Committee member Rep. James Strickler (R-San Juan-2).
Last week, the Rio Grande Foundation hosted Robert Wood with the Texas Comptroller’s office for a series of meetings on government openness and transparency with New Mexico legislators and elected officials. During his meetings, he explained Texas’ excellent websites Texas OpenBook and Where the Money Goes which includes state contracts, vendor information, and salary information for public officials in Texas.
New Mexico could and should join Texas and the dozens of other states that are using technology to give citizens and taxpayers more information on how their money is used. Unfortunately, the House Taxation and Revenue Committee apparently doesn’t want New Mexicans to have this information.

Awhile back I blogged about CNBC’s Rick Santelli and his articulate rant against some of the federal government’s poorly-designed and unfair policies. During his tirade, Santelli talked about holding a “Chicago Tea Party” to protest these policies which are killing our economy and foisting massive debt on our children and grandchildren.
Well, Santelli has started something. In fact, there is now an Albuquerque Tea Party. The head of this effort, Charlotte Salazar, will be on our radio show, “Speaking Freely” which airs on AM 1550, this Saturday from 9:45 to 10:00am.
I also understand that a Santa Fe tea party is in the planning stages. Hopefully the concept spreads statewide as it already has nationwide.

In case you missed it, John Stossel — whom the Rio Grande Foundation hosted last year — had a great show on Friday night called “Bailouts and Bull%#*&.” The show goes well beyond just the bailout issue and discusses whether or not the American Dream is still alive (it is), whether universal, taxpayer-financed pre-kindergarden is worthwhile.
For anyone who is concerned about limited government, John Stossel’s shows are mandatory viewing.

Good like finding House votes on New Mexico’s legislative website. They’re not posted there and are never made available on the site, even in a historical fashion for past sessions. That’s one of the reasons the Rio Grande Foundation created NewMexicoVotes.org. We wanted average citizens and voters to know how their legislators were voting.
Yesterday afternoon, the New Mexico House voted for one of the largest tax hikes in New Mexico history, HB 346 which would increase New Mexico’s onerous gross receipts tax by 3/4ths of a cent. The final vote is available here. Remember your Rep’s votes come Election Day and be sure to tell your Senator what you think lest we wind up with an economy-killing tax hike on individuals and businesses.

There are lots of indices of various kinds of freedom out there, but this new “Index of Freedom in the States,” which is put out by the libertarian Mercatus Center at George Mason University, is the first that combines economic freedom measures with personal freedom.
Not surprisingly, New Mexico fares rather poorly on fiscal policy (45th), regulatory policy (37th), and economic freedom (43rd). The good news is that New Mexico’s personal freedom ranks very high at 3rd best in the country. Overall, New Mexico scores 36th. Not surprisingly, New Hampshire which lacks both a sales and income tax ranks as the freest state in the nation and New York is a dismal 50th. Certainly, New Mexico has a lot of work to do in the realm of economic policies before residents of The Land of Enchantment are as wealthy as they are personally free.

While New Mexico Republicans largely are exempt from this critique because they have been out of power for so long, the fact is that there is no party of smaller, more limited government in America today. This article is food for thought, particularly considering the predicament our nation faces today.

Believe it or not, the New Mexico Legislature is on the verge of passing some very important — and positive legislation. First, there is SB 159 which has been introduced by Sen. Sander Rue. This bill which would create an online, search able database of government spending, recently passed the Senate 38-0. Hopefully the House will pick up the bill and run with it.
Indeed, the House, led by freshman Rep. Dennis Kintigh, has already passed House Memorial 78 which would study the best way to create an easily accessible, searchable database that displays the state budget and spending for each year; and submit the results by November 1, 2009. This legislation passed the House 48-14 with all the opposition coming from Democrats. Believe it or not, the Texas Comptroller actually did all this voluntarily rather than waiting for the politicians to act.
For an idea of the information that can be made available to taxpayers in these search able online databases, check out the Texas transparency portal.

In case you missed it, yesterday, the voters of Santa Fe rejected a tax hike. The real estate transfer tax was the only measure on the ballot yesterday and it would have imposed a 1 percent fee onto any portion of a home sale price higher than $750,000.
4,557 of the more than 8,400 voters who turned out in the election — about 54 percent — voted against higher taxes and the nascent but ever-growing activism organization Friends of Capitalism should be congratulated for stopping this unwise tax hike. We need more such grassroots organizations to come together around New Mexico. If you’re interested, we at the Rio Grande Foundation highly recommend and are willing to help you attend the National Taxpayers Union conference this summer. Activism works and if it works in Santa Fe (of all places) it can work in your community.

The fact that tax hikes are a bad idea right now is so self-evident that even Sen. Jerry Ortiz y Pino — one of the most left-wing members of the New Mexico Legislature — didn’t make an overt call for specific tax hikes in his recent column in The Alibi. Better still, I was not the only reader of The Alibi, an alternative weekly that is not exactly known for having many conservative or free market readers, who responded to Ortiz y Pino’s cloaked call for higher taxes.
My letter is the second one that appears on the paper’s letters page, but the one by Steve Davis makes many of the same points I do.

The United States Constitution is a much trampled upon document these days. The trend started long ago with Woodrow Wilson and FDR being among the most anti-Constitutional presidents in the history of the Republic. Of course , this trend has only worsened in recent years as both President Bush and Obama have further ignored the document, thus expanding their own powers and taking powers from the states, the REAL ID being one prominent issue that — at least so far — the states have succeeded in defeating.
Fortunately, although it has proven to be less than perfect, the Founding Fathers believed that powers should be split not only among the various federal branches, but also with the various states as a check on federal power. To that end, freshman New Mexico Representative Dennis Roch has introduced HJR 27 which re-asserts New Mexico’s rights under the 10th amendment to the US Constitution. If you are not familiar with that particular amendment, it states:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Obviously, the federal government and its agents have been ignoring the 10th amendment for a very long time, thus infringing on the rights of both the states and most especially the people as a whole, so it is our hope that Rep. Roch’s efforts will succeed or at least receive significant attention.

Here at this site, we have been tracking whether or not our New Mexico state and local political leaders have come to grips with the ongoing fiscal crisis. The answer, repeatedly (here, here, and here) is “no.” Of course, that is because politicians live in an alternate reality where unlimited quantities of money comes from the work of others and debt is almost unlimited.
Anyway, the most recent example of this “what, me worry?” mentality is the City of Albuquerque’s replacement of perfectly good street signs. I have noticed this in particular on Coors Blvd. where the usual green signs are being replaced by blue signs with Mayor Marty’s beloved “Q” in black in the background. I have no idea how much this is costing Albuquerque taxpayers, but according to this bill from City Council, the city was proposing to spend $2.5 million on street sign replacement.
Obviously, we’re talking about real money here and in difficult economic times, when City Council is considering extending (without voter approval) a 1/4-cent transportation tax, it would seem that this is money that could be better spent elsewhere.