In early July the Biden Administration issued a broad Executive Order on “Promoting Competition in the American Economy.” While there are many things to like in the Order including allowing hearing aids to be sold “over the counter” and “limiting unnecessary, cumbersome occupational licensing requirements that impede economic mobility,” there is one area of the order that should be of special concern for supporters of free markets. Specifically, that involves what amounts to partial re-regulation of  railroads.

In the Order, the Administration encouraged the Surface Transportation Board (STB) — the federal agency that oversees economic regulations for private freight railroads like Norfolk Southern and Union Pacific — to consider imposing “forced access” more regularly. This means that privately owned and maintained railroads could be forced to turn over traffic to competing railroads at potentially below-market rates – a clear violation of private property rights and free market enterprise as we know it. It is like net neutrality but for railroads.

Such a system would cause harm to most shippers and the broader economy, which railroads play a critical yet silent role in.

How would it work?
Forced access would allow companies to petition the government to force a railroad to use its infrastructure and equipment on behalf of its competitor. Railroad 2 gets access to Railroad 1’s lines because the government forces Railroad 1 to provide that access across its network. It is like the government forcing Coca-Cola to allow Pepsi to produce and bottle soda at its facility. 

Switching already happens.
Any shipper who believes a carrier is abusing its market power by engaging in anti-competitive conduct can already file a case with the federal government, and if true, they can order the switch. Proponents want to remove the need to show anticompetitive conduct.

New regulation ignores reality.
Railroads compete with trucks, barges, and other market forces. Estimates show that 80% of rail traffic is subject to competition and thus exempt from rate regulation. There is no market failure.

American businesses, consumers and taxpayers would suffer.
Widespread forced switching would force inefficiencies. Customers dissatisfied with rail service would likely move goods to strained highways. Diversion of traffic from rail to trucks, which are subsidized, create congestion and would further damage the nation’s highway system.

Railroads, like pipelines or broadband companies, cover the costs required to maintain and update their privately owned infrastructure. Investment hinges on a broad base of business and sufficient revenue. By driving railroad rates for certain customers to below-market levels at the expense of other customers through forced access, the government would ultimately hinder U.S. commerce and increase the costs of consumer goods.

You can send a note to Congress asking them to rein in the Biden Administration’s proposed policy as implemented through the Surface Transportation Board here.

Today, August 25, 2021, hundreds of protesters showed up to protest against Gov. Lujan Grisham’s vaccine and mask mandates in downtown Albuquerque. Numerous photos are below including public employees and medical professions throughout the crowd (both groups are being told to get the vaccine, or else). RGF’s president took these photos and his own protest sign reflects his opposition to ineffective mask mandates for children in school (as noted by the CDC itself).

Last week was one of the worst in ABQ in Paul’s memory. He shares a bit of his experience due to the shootings/lockdowns in NE Heights.

MLG has imposed a mask mandate and is demanding state fair attendees be vaccinated. Most New Mexico kids are back to school. While it is more “normal” than last year, there are many challenges facing New Mexicans and the education system. Paul wrote about this recently in the Las Cruces Sun News. On his way out the door, NM’s (former) PED secretary says he pushed hard for allowing outdoor learning options for New Mexico students (to no avail).

Pfizer vaccine has been approved for adults 16 and up. 

The White Sands Balloon Festival has been cancelled for another year. Is this COVID or a federal lands dispute?

According to National Bureau of Economic Research study covered by Yale News on recent research: Using a quantitative model to examine the consequences of extended school closures for high school students, the researchers determined that children living in the poorest 20% of U.S. neighborhoods will experience the most negative and long-lasting effects of school closures. For example, their model predicts that one year of school closures will cost ninth graders in the poorest communities a 25% decrease in their post-educational earning potential, even if it is followed by three years of normal schooling. By contrast, their model shows no substantial losses for students from the richest 20% of neighborhoods.

New Mexico’s unemployment rate is now 7.6%, tied with New York and California for 2nd-worst in the nation.  The Biden Administration says states can use surplus stimulus money to extend unemployment benefits beyond September 6. Will MLG?

What about a “Guaranteed basic income” for New Mexicans? 

Last school year RGF made a BIG deal about getting New Mexico kids back into their classrooms (here, here, and here). New Mexico’s so-called “progressives” including the Governor herself didn’t do much until Spring of 2021 when she finally decided to return students to their classrooms.

Outgoing PED Secretary Ryan Stewart apparently attempted to float some innovative ideas on getting kids back to in-person school, but obviously the Gov. didn’t push it and the Districts who received their money regardless were simply unwilling or unable to innovate. So, New Mexico students lost more time in classrooms than all but 5 other states. Already in the 2021-2022 school year schools in a few districts have shut down for a time due to COVID. 

And now there’s  this  report  from  the  National  Bureau  of  Economic  Research.

There has justifiably been a great deal of discussion/controversy over Gov. Lujan Grisham’s recently-imposed rules requiring vaccinations at the upcoming New Mexico State Fair.

And if you think Gov. Lujan Grisham is somehow basing her decisions on “science” and ensuring that everyone is vaccinated, the fact that  ABQ Pride Fest JUST held its festival at…Expo New Mexico (the State Fairgrounds) with NO vaccine (or testing) requirement should illustrate who the Gov. favors and who she doesn’t.

According to the Gov.’s vaccination order for the Fair, youth who are eligible for the COVID vaccine (12 years or older) must be vaccinated or tested within 48 hours of attending the Fair. The timing of that announcement left little opportunity for those young people who were willing to get the vaccine to actually do so in advance of the Fair which begins on September 9.

Of course, regardless of vaccination status, masks are still required indoors which is yet another dubious rule if all the adults in attendance are vaccinated.  As this excellent piece by Daniel Chacon of the Santa Fe New Mexican notes, there is a great deal of frustration among parents and families of children being impacted. It is also enough to give a headache to policy experts and parents alike.

The most relevant text of the Gov.’s order on the Fair is below:

With New Mexico’s Gov. Lujan Grisham having imposed a mask mandate and pushing HARD for New Mexicans to get vaccinated, the pastor of Calvary Church in Albuquerque, Skip Heitzig has put out a strong, principled statement in support of individual freedom. We wish that more community leaders had such a strong, principled stance.

RGF’s president regularly appears on the radio show ABQ Connect hosted by Jim Williams on 88.3 FM.

School has begun for most New Mexico students. While every school year is different, this year is certainly more different than most. For starters, students are returning to “semi-normal” classrooms after 1.5 years of remote learning and relative chaos. Unfortunately, as of this writing schools in Rio Rancho, Carlsbad, Los Lunas, and Roswell have “temporarily” had to again go “virtual.”

Lost classroom time has had a big impact on academic outcomes for New Mexico students. According to the Legislative Finance Committee, the Legislature’s “in-house” think tank, K-12 students in New Mexico have fallen behind anywhere from six months to two years. Furthermore, lost classroom time will widen existing learning gaps, particularly for low-income families.

Many New Mexicans likely assume that students across the nation, not just in New Mexico, spent most of the 2020-2021 school year doing remote learning, that is not the case. According to the Burbio website which tracks various COVID-related policies, Utah students spent more than 80% of the year in their classrooms last year and Colorado students were in their classrooms nearly 65% of the time. New Mexico students were in their classrooms only about 33% of the time. According to Burbio, New Mexico students lost more classroom time than students in all but five other states last year.

Even prior to COVID, we knew that New Mexico students perform worse than students in virtually any other state. Catching up from both the preexisting learning gap and the one created last year is going to be a serious challenge. Unfortunately, New Mexico’s Public Education Department (PED) is in chaos. After just 2.5 years in office, Gov. Lujan Grisham is now on her 4^th Education Secretary with the recent departure of Ryan Stewart.

At a July LFC meeting several legislators and tribal leaders raised some difficult questions about the ability of the State’s education system as it currently exists to improve student outcomes.

These were not Republicans who have long been frustrated by the growing K-12 budgets absent improved results. Rather, Democrat Rep. Derrick Lente (Sandia Pueblo) expressed concern for Native American students saying they, “have been left to rot because of where they come from” for many years. How much longer do our children have to fail for us to get this right?” Lente continued.

Another powerful, “progressive” Democrat (just named to the 2^nd-highest position in the House) Rep. Javier Martinez, D-Albuquerque said he had, “started to question whether more money is actually needed beyond what we’ve invested. I think we’re losing steam,” Martinez said, “I’d hate to be back here in 20 years talking about how nothing has changed.”

To say that we at the Rio Grande Foundation concur with these legislators’ concerns would be an understatement. We have long held that robust reforms including both increased choice and accountability are critical to improving New Mexico’s educational performance.

Of course, talking about a problem and taking action to solve it are two very different things. In this year’s 60-day legislative session several “school choice” bills were introduced only to be killed immediately.

Will the upcoming 2022 session be different? That is ultimately up to voters. Across the nation school choice is spreading rapidly in states where education policy is not controlled by unions. Unfortunately, New Mexico’s Legislature is not one of those states. School board elections are coming this fall. If you are concerned about education policy in New Mexico, educate yourself on school board candidates and vote this November. The Rio Grande Foundation’s sister organization Opportunities for All Kids New Mexico www.oaknm.org is currently surveying school board candidates and publishing the results online.

Paul Gessing is president of New Mexico’s Rio Grande Foundation. The Rio Grande Foundation is an independent, nonpartisan, tax-exempt research and educational organization dedicated to promoting prosperity for New Mexico based on principles of limited government, economic freedom and individual responsibility

On this week’s podcast, Paul interviews Jordan McGillis. Jordan is Deputy Director of Policy at the pro-energy Institute for Energy Research, a national pro-energy public policy organization.

According to July 2021 data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics New Mexico’s unemployment rate is now 7.6%, tied for 2nd-worst in the US. Here is how New Mexico stacks up with its neighbors.

RGF’s Paul Gessing recently sat down with KOAT TV Channel 7 to discuss financial details for the proposed New Mexico United Soccer stadium. There are more questions than answers at this point in the discussion which is unfortunate given that voters probably won’t have much more information than what is currently known when they go to the polls in November.

The time duration of the bond is ONE question discussed in the story, but the location of the stadium, final cost of the project, and source of money for the difference between the $50 million bond  and the final cost which will be no less than $70 million and perhaps much more are unknown.

In this story Councilor Davis asserts that the “gap” between the $50 million bond and the final cost of the stadium could be somehow filled by leveraging lease payments from the team. Of course no lease payment mechanism has been agreed to at this point, so these are purely speculative statements by Davis both on the payments themselves as well as what, if anything, those could pay for.

Click on the picture or on the link below for the full story .

Click here for a link to the story.

At the Rio Grande Foundation we pride ourselves on standing on principle. That means that among other things we oppose wasteful government spending and government subsidies for the wealthy (using your tax dollars, of course).

While we are usually at odds with New Mexico’s myriad left-wing groups, it COULD put us in alignment with PRINCIPLED left-leaning groups who, in theory, oppose such “regressive” policies. Unfortunately for New Mexico, most left-leaning organizations in New Mexico are power-seeking, not principled. They support bigger government, not improvements to conditions for the poor. Here is just a brief sampling of issues:

1. New Mexico United Stadium: takes $50 million plus dollars from average taxpayers in Albuquerque to build a soccer stadium. RGF took a stand along with two “Republican” city councilors (they are non-partisan races). Did any “progressive” group or politicians take a stand?
2. The State’s education system routinely fails ALL students, most notably poor and minority students. RGF has long called for school choice and other needed reforms only to be thwarted by unions and their supposedly “progressive” political allies.
3. Back in 2017 the Mayor of Santa Fe pushed for massive tax on soda and sugary drinks which was defeated at the ballot box. Bernie Sanders (a progressive US Senator) publicly opposed a similar tax in Philadelphia which was “fact-checked” as hurting the poor most.
4. Film subsidies are a classic case of New Mexico tax dollars being shifted from middle and working class taxpayers to wealthy film companies and producers. Alas, no left-leaning group in New Mexico has taken a public stance opposing them.

These are just a few examples of RGF stepping up to fight for “progressive” causes when the actual “progressives” fail to act. We don’t claim to be progressive, just principled.

ABQ City Council votes to put a taxpayer financed United Soccer Stadium on Albuquerque ballots this fall.

It was a depressing week in Albuquerque a 13 year old child was shot and killed at Washington elementary school in what seems like an avoidable tragedy if the father’s numerous run-ins with the law had been addressed.

The US pullout from Afghanistan is in chaos where 20 years of involvement falls apart in a few weeks.

The COVID Delta variant continues to spread w/ Pfizer & Moderna vaccines showing only limited effectiveness.

Biden asks OPEC to increase oil production while he attacks US producers.

Despite a judge’s order, the Administration has NOT restarted issuing permits.

Richard Branson may have flown aboard, commercial spaceflights out of Spaceport America, but commercial flights from the facility won’t happen for another year.

Census data reflect population growth in conservative areas of Southeast New Mexico. 

The Albuquerque Journal acknowledges inflation is becoming a serious issue in several articles, but they don’t have much to say about government policy and how it is creating the problem.

Should the New Mexico Legislature be paid?

As we have noted frequently in this space, New Mexico’s Spaceport opened on October 11, 2011. While Richard Branson’s much-hyped flight gained international attention and raised hopes for the facility, the recent announcement that manned space tourism flights would not take place for another year (late summer 2022) has to be considered another significant setback for the facility.

Yes, Virgin Galactic wants to launch tourists successfully and frequently, but that doesn’t do much to gain New Mexicans a return on their $225+ million investment. Will the launches actually happen next year? Only time will tell.

Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin claims it will launch two commercial flights by the end of 2021. 

The Albuquerque Journal has figured out that inflation is increasing rapidly and causing problems for New Mexico businesses. So, we got two stories (here and here)  in the Monday, August 16 edition of the newspaper which include interviews with numerous businesses and a few economists on the rapid rise in prices across the economy.

What was missing? Government “stimulus” policies, especially the “enhanced” unemployment benefits. The only hint of government’s inflationary policies impacting inflation is the following from the owner of Car Crafters saying, “it chafes him that people are out there making more staying home when he sees his staff pushing themselves so hard…It just seems unfair.”

What are those inflationary policies? Well, start with the Federal Reserve. That is discussed in detail by Mises Institute economist Bob Murphy here. 

The generous unemployment benefits and overall economic “stimulus” payments are direct factors as well. People have more money in their hands and with supply chains slow to normalize, inflation is an obvious result.

There are numerous other government factors impacting inflation including rising fuel prices (thanks in part to the Biden Administration’s ongoing anti-oil and gas policies including ongoing permitting issues and the Keystone XL pipeline cancellation.

Navarette is a Washington Post columnist whose writings often appear in the Albuquerque Journal. While we tend to not focus on national politics at RGF and almost NEVER respond directly to their columns, but THIS one (linked above and which ran in the Journal on Friday) truly set off RGF president Paul Gessing who in turn penned this response to Navarette.

Dear Mr. Navarrette,

I read your piece relating to masking kids in school with great dismay. I used to respect you as a proponent for school choice. Once upon a time you used to be a staunch advocate for transforming our schools into institutions that served the children and parents that pay (albeit indirectly) for them. Apparently when it comes to masks you take the “shut up and mask up” position.

Timothy Sandefur is an attorney at the Arizona-based Goldwater Institute. He was the Rio Grande Foundation’s attorney in a case before the 10th Circuit dealing with donor privacy that recently was decided by the appeals court. Paul and Tim discuss the case, the US Supreme Court, and issues of donor privacy.

In the private sector pay for performance is commonplace. Perhaps it is time for “reverse psychology” in New Mexico’s Legislature. A proposal by Sen. Daniel Ivey-Soto to pay New Mexico legislators was discussed in an interim committee recently and we talked about it with The Center Square.

New Mexico has an “unpaid” Legislature. While RGF does not take a philosophical issue with having such a Legislature, it is clear that what is currently happening in Santa Fe is not working. Most of that blame falls on voters who have repeatedly elected people who have no idea how to bring jobs and economic growth to the State, but it is at least possible that paying legislators will enable qualified people who cannot currently run for office to do so.

Will paying legislators actually reduce corruption or improve the quality of elected candidates? We don’t know, but we’re not opposed to trying something new. That said, IF legislators are paid, it would seem that the generous legislative pension system could be on the chopping block.  

NM vaccine mandate for state employees. Gov. and numerous other Democrat legislators, US senators/reps, and legislators send letter “asking” businesses to require vaccination for employees AND customers. Will this lead to fraudulent vaccine cards?

7 day moving average COVID deaths as of August 8, 465. In January that was 3,500. Aside from a month ago or so the ONLY time we had lower numbers of COVID deaths in the USA was in late March of 2020. NM death rate remains 13th-highest. Much-criticized Florida is 26th highest. Dr. Michael Osterholm who was one of Biden’s top COVID advisors recently made waves saying cloth masks don’t really work.  Floyd and Cloudcroft school districts stand up to the Gov. on masking kids and Floyd is suspended.

MLG is coming for your car again (clean fuel standards upcoming session) Also, On top of that the State is now involved in rule-making to require that between 7 and 10% of vehicles sold in NM by 2025 will have to be “zero emissions.”

A new taxpayer-financed stadium for the United Soccer team is on the ballot this fall: In public comment, critics outnumbered supporters about 13 to 1.

City of Albuquerque matches record w/ 81 homicides, RGF visits and photographs sites near the planned stadium.

RGF “loses” battle in war over campaign finance: 10th circuit Court of appeals claimed we didn’t have standing in a campaign finance case involving Santa Fe Soda Tax.

This article first appeared in the Albuquerque Journal on August 10th, 2021.

Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller has decided that, despite rampant crime and a homeless problem that has grown dramatically worse on his watch, building a new soccer stadium for New Mexico United should be a top city priority. The stadium itself, to be located somewhere in the vicinity of Downtown, will cost taxpayers in excess of $70 million. That doesn’t include land acquisition, parking or inevitable cost overruns.

If the City Council approves the deal, Albuquerque voters will vote on whether to finance the project this November. It is difficult to see how financing a new soccer stadium is anywhere near the top of the city’s agenda. Albuquerque is a city with serious problems.

Recently the Journal reported on rampant crime along East Central. Of course, crime and homelessness are rampant along Central, Downtown and in many parts of our city. It would be far easier to name the few places in Albuquerque where there is not a significant crime and homeless problem than to name all the places that have issues.

In a recent report WalletHub identifies the city of Albuquerque as having the fourth-highest increase in homicides per capita in the nation (2020 vs 2021). Combined with Albuquerque’s already high crime levels before the pandemic, public safety would top most lists for local needs.

Notably, the Albuquerque Police Department budget has not changed substantially in recent years. By no means am I suggesting more dollars always result in better outcomes, but the perceived lack of prioritization on public safety implicates Mayor Keller’s belief that crime is not as important as building a stadium. Or, perhaps, as he heads into his reelection campaign, he is trying to change the subject from crime to stadium.

And then there is the Downtown location. State and local governments have spent decades trying to revitalize Downtown Albuquerque with little success. With safety and homeless problems only getting worse and Downtown businesses still not recovered from the one-two punches of COVID-19 lockdowns and protests, this is a particularly risky time to invest taxpayer dollars in a Downtown stadium.

On the other hand, New Mexicans, not just locals, have flocked to The Pit, Isotopes Park and UNM Stadium for decades. These facilities are all located in the same area of town, have abundant parking shared among the various facilities and little in the way of crime or homeless issues. United does extremely well in attendance at Isotopes Park, allowing the team to vault to the top of attendance rankings in the USL.

It seems Keller is a believer in “Mad Men’s” Don Draper school of thought: If you don’t like what’s being said, change the conversation. He has failed in the basic government task of public safety and keeping the city clean, so now he’s distracting voters with a shiny new stadium.

In the end, economists across the political spectrum agree that taxpayer-funded stadiums are economic-losers.

To that end, the St. Louis Federal Reserve’s May 2017 report “The Economics of Subsidizing Sports Stadiums” concluded, “Rather than subsidizing sports stadiums, governments could finance other projects such as infrastructure or education that have the potential to increase productivity and promote economic growth.”

I urge the City Council and ultimately the voters to heed their advice.

Rio Grande Foundation is New Mexico’s free-market research institute and think tank. An advocate for open government, the author leads the foundation’s government transparency and accountability efforts.

According to recent reports, the New Mexico Legislature held hearings on some kind of “guaranteed basic income” for New Mexico. At this point we’re going to reserve judgement for a more detailed proposal although we did post something relating to Santa Fe’s “fake” experiment with such a program. 

Here are a few thoughts:

1. Will this replace or augment existing welfare programs? Obviously we prefer a replacement rather than an increase;
2. How will this impact New Mexico’s already high unemployment rate and low workforce participation rates?
3. Will it be given to ALL New Mexicans or just the “poor”?
4. Will it resemble Alaska’s “dividend” program which is funded through that State’s “Permanent Fund?” 

   Unlike a lot of redistribution schemes coming out of Santa Fe we’re not going to dismiss this one out-of-hand. There are certainly right and wrong approaches to this issue.
   

On principal, RGF opposes spending taxpayer dollars for the benefit of sports teams. But, in a world in which no priority is too big or too small for the federal government, let alone state or local government, to spend money on, that argument doesn’t get very far.

So, here are some of the most important arguments against the current plans for a New Mexico United Stadium. While the result of a vote will depend on many factors, the fact that so many people who DID take the time to offer public comments were opposed to taxpayer funding of the stadium is a strong indicator that the arguments are on that side (unlike many public comment opportunities, there was no interest group coordinating them, these were organic):

1. THIS is the City’s priority? Albuquerque JUST set a record for homicides and there are 4.5 months left in 2021. Police cite “lack of resources” as a big issue. Clearly, there are OTHER more-important priorities for City government and our tax dollars.
2.  Will the United have “skin” in the game? The Isotopes pay the City of Albuquerque over $1 million annually in rent for Isotopes Park which was built in the footprint of the existing baseball stadium (and thus at a cost savings). What will the United be paying or is this a one-way financial relationship?
3. We know that downtown Albuquerque (including the areas around the proposed sites) face numerous challenges in terms of public safety and homelessness that could derail this project. What will be done to “clean up” these areas and why aren’t they being done NOW? Will those efforts be enough to keep fans coming?
4. Little has been said about the properties that would need to be purchased to build the stadium and essential amenities. How much parking will be needed and how many existing buildings (including potential historical sites) will need to be leveled for this facility?
5. What about existing sites? UNM has both a state-of-the-art soccer facility AND a little-used football stadium (less than 10 games annually) that could seemingly accommodate the United, how about a more cost-effective solution there? And, while the league the United play in seemingly requires a soccer-specific stadium, are they going to kick out their attendance leader because they share a stadium with a minor league baseball team?

A few weeks ago Gov. MLG told us that the Legislature would be considering her proposal for a “clean fuel standard” for cars sold in New Mexico. That involved a mandate to use various gasoline alternatives like ethanol, switchgrass, or whatever they can come up with.

On top of that the State is now involved in rule making to require that between 7 and 10% of vehicles sold in NM by 2025 will have to be “zero emissions.”

Interestingly, as the Albuquerque Journal points out,

NMED data shows the transportation category emitted about 16 million metric tons in 2018, or 14% of greenhouse gas emissions.

The oil and gas industry accounts for 53% of state pollution.

The state estimates the (clean car) changes would slash carbon dioxide emissions by about 2 million tons by 2030.

While the New Mexico Automotive Dealers Association appears poised to “go along to get along,” I’d expect a lot of “vehicle smuggling” to occur from neighboring states. Of course that will necessitate further enforcement and draconian efforts to deny registration to vehicles that don’t comply with these regulations.

New rules for COVID 19. State releases rules on Monday, CDC follows up, APS enacts universal masking in schools. What’s the science? Does it make any sense to tell vaccinated people to mask up? Masks are ALSO recommended. Are lockdowns coming?

20 cities across New Mexico held anti-masking in school policies. We attended the one in ABQ.

Sheryl Williams Stapleton is in trouble. We can explain the details and what it means. RGF has long had concerns with Rep. Stapleton’s name being attached to a facility at Expo NM. She has resigned from her House seat.

The NM United soccer team has unveiled plans for a new taxpayer-funded soccer stadium. RGF has concerns.

PNM is concerned about brownouts next summer when the San Juan Generating Station is closed.

A new report says NM is the #1 economically-failing state while Utah is the #1 thriving state. 

 RGF calls Attorney General’s Public-Nuisance Suit against medical-product sterilization firm a dangerous abuse of state authority

Senator Heinrich responds to our natural gas piece. So does Demis Foster of Conservation Voters New Mexico. We discuss.

Paul had a fun conversation with the guys at the New Mexico Rising podcast. You can find the conversation below on Youtube as well as audio versions of this and other podcast episodes here.