In case you haven’t seen it already, I have an opinion piece on health care reform in today’s Albuquerque Journal. With not one, but two, recent op-eds having appeared in the paper’s opinion pages on behalf of “Medicare for All,” it is a bit disappointing that the editor felt the need to run a “pro-reform” op-ed alongside mine.

As I wrote yesterday, I was going to be on Channel 4 to discuss a high speed rail proposal that Governor Richardson and Sen. Tom Udall are eying. The story led off the 6pm news and my interview was the bulk of the story.

Check it out here.

The American Petroleum Institute has put out its annual energy quiz. The interactive quiz will ask about 25 questions about energy and energy policy. There are no “gimmees!” I scored only 55%. See if you can beat me and post a comment.

The critics and pundits say that newsprint is dead. Don’t believe it! The Rio Grande Foundation has a print publication focusing on issues relating to the Legislature and state policy issues called Capitol Report New Mexico. You can subscribe to Capitol Report by donating to the Rio Grande Foundation.

Another recently-launched publication is The New Mexico Breeze. The publication attempts to:

1. better inform readers regarding politics and current events with behind-the-scenes information, and

2. provide positive news about the state, leaving readers with a sense of pride as New Mexicans.

Recently they published an article by our own Jim Scarantino on the paper’s front page.

Speaking Freely airs 9am to 10am on Saturdays. Jim and I will be discussing health care reform with Albuquerque-based doctor Torre Near, MD. Dr. Near recently wrote a great opinion piece on health care that appeared in the Albuquerque Journal.

Tune in to the show and feel free to give us a call at 505-265-1550. It is sure to be an interesting discussion.

I just got around to reading last Sunday’s Albuquerque Journal opinion section. There I saw a piece by Nick Mandel’s piece “Pension Envy Won’t Fix State Budget, Policy Woes.” As far as I could tell, the organization does not have a website, but the essence of Mandel’s argument is:

1) Yes, government pensions are far more generous than those offered by the private sector because government can always extract money from the private sector and they don’t have any profit pressures (but please don’t hold it against us);
2) Cuts can be made to the Governor’s exempt employee hires, double-dipping should be stopped, and taxes should be raised on corporations in order to bring in more money. Well, two out of three ain’t bad. Certainly, Richardson’s has hired great numbers of exempt employees and double-dipping should be stopped (of course, the problem is that public employees are able to get pensions far too early, thus they can retire and get back to work for the government again).

I took a different take in a recent article on the pension situation. Sure, government pensions have been reduced by $80 million, but this is a drop in the bucket. As we’ve discussed in the past, the number and overall compensation levels of government employment are out of line with the private sector. Mandel prefers to ignore that.

So, Mandel offers a few good options for cost savings (and one bad tax hike), but that doesn’t mean that an inflated government bureaucracy is not a problem.

Those who advocate for government-run health care reform love to talk about how “simple” their plans are and how they are the ones restoring the patient-doctor relationship. The problem is that anytime government is involved in managing the economy, things get complicated…and fast.

Here is a flow-chart illustrating how the House Democrats’ health care plan would work in practice:

Unfortunately, the flow chart does not adequately illustrate how the $1.5 trillion extra needed to run the plan will have to be obtained.

This article more fully explains the flow chart and how it will be used.

Last week I wrote about my appearance on Channel 4’s News on the topic of “high-speed rail.” Of course, when government officials discuss rail in a “high-speed” context, some inevitably get stars in their eyes and believe that this means 150 mph or more.

Blogger Heath Haussamen makes this mistake in his weekly blog roundup when he writes that 2 hours to Denver would be “cool.” He’s actually citing a post by the Santa Fe Reeper blog which fantasizes about actual high speed rail to Denver which is being advocated by a special interest, but is not even remotely on the table policy-wise because it would be ridiculously expensive.

The reality is that Denver and Albuquerque are 450 miles apart. Even running at the Reeper’s fantasy speed of 200 mph, trains won’t go from ABQ to Denver in 2 hours. At 110 mph, the speed proposed by President Obama, Governor Richardson, and Sen. Udall, a train trip from Albuquerque to Denver would take at least 5 or 6 hours.

Rail advocates can dream about 200 mph rail in New Mexico if they want to, but if Obama had any brains at all, he’d focus resources on increasing speeds on Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor, an area with far greater population density than New Mexico and Colorado, yet the Acela only gets up to 150 mph, it’s top speed, for a few miles of its trip between Washington, DC and Boston.

The RailRunner is already enough of a boondoggle. Can’t we stop wasting our money with that?

You can listen to the podcast of this and other episodes of “Speaking Freely” here.

On Saturday’s episode, Jim and Paul discussed Diane Denish’s recent pronouncements on government transparency and whether her ties to the corruption of the Richardson Administration and silence regarding ongoing scandals detracts from her forward-looking stance on the issue. Then, Jim and Paul discuss plans for “high speed rail” being put forth by President Obama, Governor Richardson, and Sen. Udall and whether the plans make sense for New Mexico.

Brian Colón, the Chairman of the Democratic Party of New Mexico, and I took part in an online health care debate for the Albuquerque Journal last week. He essentially re-stated his opening remarks in an opinion piece on health care that appeared yesterday in the Journal.

Unfortunately, while Colón is good at providing talking points as to why we need health care reform, he does a lot of writing without actually suggesting any specific ways in which Americans in general and New Mexicans in general can obtain less costly, better health care. This is not a surprise since Colón is not a policy expert, rather he is a party builder, and he may not want to step on any toes. After all, not all elected Democrats support “universal,” let alone single-payer, health care.

Unlike Brian, I have actually proposed some specific health care reforms that will, if adopted, reduce costs and lead to better health care. The problem I have with most advocates of so-called “reform” is that they are working under the assumption that the politicians can get together and Washington and come up with a government system that will please everyone. Unfortunately (for them), as Obama and Congressional leadership have been forced to come up with specifics, the various interest groups have started fighting and the plan seems to be stalling.

The simple fact is that we live in a world of limited resources. While everyone thinks they can get their way when they sit down at the lobbying table, the fact is that someone ultimately loses in a zero-sum game.

While New Mexicans have been led to believe that their economic futures are tied to the New Mexico Spaceport now being built near Truth or Consequences, the truth is that spaceports are already under development across the nation.

With an already-crowded spaceport field, I read over the weekend in the Albuquerque Journal that Hawaii is the next state that may be entering the fray. According to the report:

If the plan goes forward, tourists would pay $200,000 for a weeklong package including spaceflight training, resort accommodations and short test flights to simulate weightlessness.

At the vacation’s finale, five voyagers would embark on a horizontal takeoff aboard a special rocket plane, climb to 40,000 feet before rockets fire, accelerate to 3,500 mph, coast for a few minutes of weightlessness 62 miles above the Earth, flip over and then return to ground.

While New Mexico’s spaceport will undoubtedly be an early entrant into , it seems highly unlikely that the space industry will be very lucrative for the Land of Enchantment given the ever-increasing number of competitors. Perhaps Hawaii Governor Linda Lingle will give Hawaii taxpayers a break by not releasing funding for that State’s spaceport. Unfortunately, spaceport fever seems to be spreading among elected officials nationwide.

In case you missed it, as I blogged earlier this week, I took part in an online debate on health care that was sponsored by the Albuquerque Journal. Day four of the debate postings and comments are available here.

If you enjoyed this, please let the Journal know and ask them to continue to invite the Rio Grande Foundation to take part in these discussions.

Lt. Governor Diane Denish is running for the state’s top office in 2010. She will be a formidable candidate, there is no doubt about it. Her biggest hurdle is most likely to be the time she has spent closely associated with current Gov. Bill Richardson. And, while it is true that they did not run as a ticket, there is no doubt that voters and the public will wonder why she didn’t do more to stop corruption and ethics violations that have run rampant in Santa Fe.

That said, Denish is due some credit for her recent public pledge to make transparency a centerpiece of her campaign. According to this story in Forbes, Denish has proposed creating a Web-based “sunshine portal” that would allow New Mexicans to track state expenditures, check on scheduled meetings, learn more about high-level state employees and their salaries, check out laws and regulations and offer opinions.

While I’m not sure what to make of one of her other proposals, that being for a powerful statewide ethics commission that “could investigate ethics complaints, launch its own probes, impose fines, refer cases for criminal prosecution, and establish a code of ethics and training for state workers and appointees,” the sunshine portal really is newsworthy and I think the Rio Grande Foundation can take some credit for this. In fact, we introduced Denish (and many other legislators in Santa Fe) this session to Robert Wood of the Texas Comptroller’s office. Texas’s comptroller Susan Combs has been a national leader in promoting government transparency and would be a great model for Denish and/or others who want to improve government transparency to follow.

The Rio Grande Foundation actually maintains a “Sunshine Page.” We call it Sunshine Review. Check out various transparency-related legislation here.

As I wrote yesterday, I was going to be on Channel 4 to discuss a high speed rail proposal that Governor Richardson and Sen. Tom Udall are eying. The story led off the 6pm news and my interview was the bulk of the story.

Check it out here.

Governor Richardson and Sen. Tom Udall held a press conference today to discuss efforts to bring “high speed rail” to New Mexico. According to the two of them, “New Mexico, Colorado and Texas could receive up to $5 million from the Federal Railroad Administration under the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 to study the viability of the El Paso to Denver High-Speed Rail Corridor.” Watch the 6pm news on Channel 4 as I was interviewed on the high speed rail issue earlier today.

While using taxpayer money to study these issues is minor in the scope of the overall federal budget, the Rio Grande Foundation has produced a study on the issue that throws cold water on the idea of high speed rail. The release is available here and the full paper can be found here.

As author Randal O’Toole points out in the study:

The administration’s proposed high-speed rail plan will cost $1,000 for every federal income taxpayer, yet the average American will ride high-speed trains less than 60 miles a year, says a new report from the Rio Grande Foundation. The report says that the average New Mexico resident will rarely use high-speed trains.

The federal government is proposing to build true high-speed rail lines—with trains going faster than 120 miles per hour—only in California and Florida. In most of the rest of the country, it is merely proposing to upgrade existing freight tracks to boost top Amtrak speeds from 79 to 110 mph.

Trains with a top speed of 110 mph will have average speeds of just 55 to 75 mph. Not only will that attract few people out of their cars, says the report, such trains will actually be less energy efficient and more polluting than driving.

The federal government left New Mexico out of its plans entirely. But New Mexico’s share of local proposals for moderate-speed trains Albuquerque to Denver are likely to cost $400 for every New Mexico resident—and true high-speed trains would cost at least $7,500 for every New Mexican.

Seems like we could save that $5 million and use it for something a bit more useful than another study, but if the study is done honestly, it will likely show that the costs of moderately high speed rail far outweigh the benefits.

My apologies for not getting last week’s episode up more quickly, but the show from July 27 is now up as is the July 4 show.

On the 27th, Jim and I interview Tina with the Albuquerque Tea Party about the 4th of July Tea Party (video of event here), then Jim and Paul discuss the difficulties of doing business in the oil and gas industries in New Mexico with the author of a new international study on the topic. Lastly, Jim and Paul interview 1st district (Albuquerque-area) Republican Congressional candidate Jon Barela.

On the 4th of July show Jim Scarantino revisited the Declaration of Independence and it’s world-changing proclamations of fundamental human rights. Jim also discussed political corruption in New Mexico with Harvey Yates, the GOP’s new chairman, who has a personal story to tell of how he stood up to a shake down by the Valencia County attorney.

All speaking freely podcasts are available here.

If you have ever been to this blog before, it should be readily apparent that the site has been changed quite dramatically. We have shifted from MoveAble Type to WordPress which I’m told is better and more modern. I certainly think the site’s appearance has been improved dramatically. I’d be interested in your thoughts, so please feel free to leave a comment.

Thanks to our intern Jason Foral and to Pat Riley at Ovationsolutions, our internet provider and technological advisors.

This week the Albuquerque Journal is holding an online debate over the various health care issues now being debated in Congress. I was asked to participate along with Brian Colón, the Chairman of the Democratic Party of New Mexico, Todd Sandman of Presbyterian Healthcare Services, Dr. Vicki L. Perrigo, and lefty blogger Barbara Wold.
Check out the first round of questions and answers here. Check back at the Journal’s “City Seeker” blog site to follow the debate all week long.

There are so many stories out there about rail systems that over-promise, under-deliver, and go way over budget. Denver is one major city that unwisely passed major tax hikes (with voter approval) to pay for a train system. In that city’s case, the train is called FasTracks. Unfortunately, although not unpredictably, as was written up recently in the Denver Post, the system is costing way more to build than originally anticipated — or at least what the politicians were willing to tell the voters to get the system approved.
According to the article:

Voters approved a $4.7 billion FasTracks plan in 2004, agreeing to pay an additional 0.4 percent sales tax for RTD to build 119 miles of rail throughout the metro area by 2017. RTD says it needs an additional 0.4 percent sales tax — which would bring its total to 1.4 percent.

Also, as I mentioned earlier, unrealistic assumptions were integral to getting voter approval:

RTD used relatively aggressive projections for long-term growth of sales-tax revenues in its 2004 FasTracks plan. Lower revenue forecasts might have forced RTD to scale back the project or seek a bigger tax increase, hurting its chances at the polls. The Post found that RTD’s revenue growth projections were among the highest of eight transit and planning agencies in the West and Midwest. Only planners in Phoenix used a higher average long-term growth projection.

Thankfully, at least to date, Albuquerque has not followed Denver to streetcar hell. Hopefully stories from Denver deter politicians and voters alike from going down the same track.
HT: Harold Morgan

Have a great Independence Day (while remembering the principles that made America a great nation in the first place) and a successful tea party.

Obama and the other advocates for massive new taxes and regulations on energy usage are claiming that their legislation will result in the creation of millions of new “green jobs.” Unfortunately, the reality is not so rosy.
As our friends at the Property and Environment Research Center (PERC) write in their report “7 Myths of Green Jobs,” there is no agreed upon example of “green jobs,” many supposedly “green” jobs are simply clerical positions that are necessary only to handle the red tape and regulations associated with dealing with government rules, regulations, and subsidies. There are several other myths associated with the supposed creation of “green jobs.” Hopefully all 100 members of the United States Senate read a copy of this report before voting on Waxman-Markey.

I’ll give him credit, John R. Hall, writing in today’s Albuquerque Journal, knows how to push people’s buttons in support of universal health care. His argument goes something like this: Obama supports it, doctors support it, the American people support it. The only ones who don’t support “universal” health care are the big, nasty insurance and drug companies, not to mention the media. Oh, and by the way, our current health care system is killing us and our babies and free market capitalism is a failure.
Hall has his polling data correct as far as I can tell. Of course, if enough people sell a given product (even socialized health care!) as a cure for all our problems, large numbers of people will begin to believe. Especially when they never see the drawbacks to the system they are being sold. But, Hall is flat out wrong when he says “America’s statistics on life expectancy and infant mortality are approaching Third World standards.” According to this table, we are on par with Ireland, Denmark, Finland, and several other decidedly 1st world nations when it comes to life expectancy and our infant mortality is rate is far better than third world nations, especially when you account for the fact that there are significant differences in the way the nations collect this data which make the US look worse than it really is.
But these two data sets are largely irrelevant when it comes to socialized medicine and the system proposed by Mr. Hall. Can capitalism work in health care? Hall argues that it cannot, but he does not provide a single shred of data as to how socialized medicine will improve our current system. We at the Rio Grande Foundation always provide real, specific, market-based solutions to our problems.
Socialized medicine’s advocates seem to think that the government has magical powers to allocate resources in an ideal manner that will make everyone happy and will do this all in a more efficient manner than exists now — or could possibly exist were we to pursue market-based reforms. Fortunately, even Obama realizes that reality is in conflict with that fantasy. Hopefully political reality finishes the job in killing a drastic move towards further socialization of our health care.

As I blogged recently, New Mexico’s government employees are suing the state in an attempt to head-off reduced pension benefits and longer work requirements prior to retirement. The Rio Grande Foundation has previously exposed New Mexico’s bloated state and local government bureaucracy. I pull the items together in this new opinion piece.

The Rio Grande Foundation has introduced a new study from prominent transportation expert Randal O’Toole who has analyzed the limited positive impact high speed rail will have on Americans and New Mexicans in particular in terms of mobility and the tremendous impact such “investments” will have on taxpayers. Read more in the study release here.
The full study is available here.