Red Clay Citizen

Privatizing Government

What does the Democratic-led US Senate do when its government run restaurants are operating at deficits each year and the food and service is "substandard"?

It agrees to privatize them.  Sen. Diane Feinstein comments:

"Candidly, I don't think the taxpayers should be subsidizing something that doesn't need to be. There are parts of government that can be run like a business and should be run like businesses."

In a letter to colleagues, Feinstein said that the Government Accountability Office found that "financially breaking even has not been the objective of the current management due to an expectation that the restaurants will operate at a deficit annually." (emphasis mine).

How many other government operations lack profit motive that would be better served through private enterprise?  I would bet quite a few if we started making a list.

Right Hand - Left Hand?

The House budget released today has a few inconsistencies. Take, for instance, the $193,000 increase for Tarheel Challenge at the same time House budget writers are placing the Tarheel Challenge program under continuation review. (Continuation review, for those who don't know, is a new tool the Legislature started using last year which requires that select programs justify their existence in order to receive funding in the future.) The $193,000 increase for Tarheel Challenge is one-time money, but it doesn't make a lot of sense to throw any extra money at a program while you are supposedly considering whether or not to continue it. Last year, programs that received continuation reviews not only didn't get any extra money, the money they were already getting was made nonrecurring - future funding of any kind was made contingent on the results of the review.

House Money Report (pdf)        House Budget Bill (pdf)

N&O: Perpetuating the Tax-Growth Myth

The News & Observer is playing handmaiden to the left again. This time it's another "we need higher taxes to deal with growth" narrative. Don't believe it for a second. These are social engineers who want your money to expand social services and build expensive, but useless projects such as light rail.

Think of it like this: a 100 lb. woman and a 200 lb. man both blow .08 on the Breathalizer test when pulled over by the police. While the 200 lb man may have drunk much more alcohol, the percentage of alcohol in his blood is the same.

Analogously, why would we need higher taxes if more people are here paying taxes (and the influx is coming largely from people who are either buying property, or buying property AND spending money AND holding jobs)? That's all a proportional tax revenue increase. The only reason we would need more or higher taxes is if government is being wasteful or social engineering. Of course, it goes without saying that...

But when's the last time you heard the N&O or the government think about making cuts or efficiency measures? Speaking truth to power, they don't.
-Max Borders

The Public Disconnect Between Bonds and Taxes

While reading through this article in the Greensboro News-Record about a county commissioner's push to increase their local sales tax, this specific passage jumped out at me:

"Guilford County voters this month approved $651.4 million in bonds for schools, GTCC and a county jail. And after the vote, many commissioners said the only option to pay for the debt would be through property tax rate increases. On that same day, a quarter-cent sales tax failed by a 3-to-1 vote."

The fact that bonds are approved by voters so routinely while local tax increases continue to be defeated by wide margins provides more evidence to a theory of mine: many voters simply are not aware of what it means when they approve a bond. I believe many of them do not understand that they are authorizing an increase of their local government's debt. A debt that will have to be repaid - with interest - using their tax dollars.(For many years, I was one of those people) This lack of understanding explains, in part, why voters approve bonds so frequently while rejecting tax increases - they don't realize that approving a bond will put upward pressure on their tax burden.

Another factor, I believe, is that the bonds are always sold to the public as paying for something specific like schools or parks, so citizens are made to feel guilty about "rejecting" such projects.

How can we fix this disconnect? How about some "truth in lending" practices on bond referenda, one of our recommendations in our Budget & Taxes Blueprint:

"The state should mandate that “responsible lending” language be included on bond referendums. Specific details about the total amount required to repay the debt, including a breakdown of principle and interest, should be required in the ballot language. Voters should also be clearly informed that the spending of bond funds is above and beyond the current operating budget and thus constitute a new spending burden. Finally, the ballot language should clearly explain that the debt will be repaid using tax dollars and that a tax increase might be required to finance the debt."

I would be very curious to see the approval rate of bonds if government became more transparent about the debt they are issuing.

Budget Myth: Cig Taxes Will Pay for Teacher Salaries

All we've heard this week on the Governor's budget is that he proposes raising the cigarette tax by $0.20 per pack to "give teachers a 7 percent pay increase."

Well, the numbers don't really add up.

Increasing the cigarette tax is estimated to bring in roughly $99 million next year.
Increasing teacher pay by 7% (and administrators by 6%) will cost $302.7 million.

Yet, nothing is said about where that extra $200 million is coming from.

And if the cigarette tax is "successful" in getting less people to smoke, then there will be less revenues each year.
Teacher salary increases are permanent and never go down.
You, me and every other taxpayer is on the hook for the rest of the money.

So don't believe the budget hype that the cigarette tax is "going to pay for" teacher salary increases.  It's just not true.

Oogle the Threatened Species

One of the "highlights" of Gov. Mike Easley's final budget (wow, it's good to say that), is wanting to spend $2.7 million to build a Polar Bear exhibit at the NC Zoo in Asheboro.

Apparently our existing Polar Bear containment area isn't up to Canadian standards for us to give them their bears.

Today, the US Interior Department added polar bears to the list of "threatened species" due to "the decline in Arctic Sea Ice from global warming."

Well, if the Arctic is getting too warm, what do you call August in central North Carolina?

Governor's Budget: Higher Taxes, More Spending

What would you have expected?

So, About that Budget...

Bad news for NC budget writers today.

First, Tax Collections Slowing.

Now, Feds withhold $175 million from state. (BTW, how old is that picture of Dan Gerlach? Seriously, is that his high school yearbook picture?)

The Federal government has so little faith in NC to administer the mental health program that they are withholding Medicare and Medicaid funds.  Yikes.

Maybe the session will be a little more interesting than the borefest everyone is predicting.

TABOR in N.C.: Rein in Spending?

Barry Smith blogs on budgets and controlling spending. He says:

In addition to limiting spending, the Taxpayer Bill of Rights would set up a budget stabilization fund, sort of like a rainy day fund, for surplus revenue. That money could be used during economic slowdowns to avert major budget cuts. Once money in that fund reaches a certain threshold, money would be rebated to taxpayers. It would also set up a mechanism for higher spending or tax increases, should there be a public demand for it. Those increases would likely require either a vote of the people or a supermajority in both the House and the Senate.

Sounds good, but I won't hold my breath.
-Max Borders

AFP Slams U.S. Rep. Price for Porcine Apologetics

David Price thinks costly, vote-buying, pork-barrel projects are ay-okay, according to this article.

Americans for Prosperity disagrees:

“Congressman Price’s defense of the earmarking system shows just how out of touch he is with North Carolina’s taxpayers.

“He claims that pork-barrel earmarks don’t lead to extra spending, but the fact is earmarks are routinely used to buy votes for bloated spending bills that would never pass if nearly every Member of Congress didn’t have a pet project in them.
 
“Congressman Price claims that he opposes funding for unworthy “road to nowhere” projects, yet last year he opposed all 50 proposed amendments that would have killed funding for questionable projects all over the country.  Among the projects that Congressman Price deemed worthy of North Carolinians’ tax dollars: $50,000 for a Mule and Packers Museum in California, $150,000 for the American Ballet Theater in New York City, $200,000 for a Lobster Institute in Maine, and $100,000 to build a prison museum in Kansas.

“Are these really necessary projects that North Carolina’s hard-working taxpayers need to be funding?  Congressman Price apparently thinks so, and that shows just how out of touch is really is.”

Budget & Tax Blueprint for N.C.

Check it out.

Walker's Wisdom

You better look out: our entitlement system is unsustainable. This, unlike global warming, is a real problem and we can't grow our way out of it.
-Max Borders

Out of Whack

When the Governor's budget comes out in a couple of months and SEANC starts whining about pay increases for state employees, someone send them this:

"State and local government workers are enjoying major gains in compensation, pushing the value of their average wages and benefits far ahead of private workers"

Borrowing Our Way into the Future....

For those of you who think government already borrows too much money, you might not want to read the 2008 Debt Affordability Study (DAS). Released yesterday by the Department of the State Treasurer, the report essentially gives a green light for the state to take on up to $479 million in new debt for each of the next ten years. For the first time, DAS also says the state could issue $175 million in new transportation-related debt for each of the next ten years. While the DAS is intended to help provide sound debt management practices, regrettably, the annual report has often become the starting point for determining the level of state borrowing. This year’s recommended debt ceiling is about $95 million higher than last year’s recommended level.

While ever-rising debt levels are certainly cause for concern, an even bigger issue is the type of debt.  DAS has warned against government’s growing preference for “special indebtedness” – mostly in the form of certificates of participation. Special indebtedness is bad for a variety of reasons. Politicians like special indebtedness because it doesn’t require voters to approve borrowing. If that weren’t bad enough, special indebtedness projects also carry a higher interest rate than general obligation bonds. North Carolina’s addiction to special indebtedness borrowing has been quick.  In less than ten years, the percentage of special indebtedness outstanding has increased from 10.4 percent in 2004 to 39.2 percent in 2013.  But the damage doesn't end here. If trends continue, “by 2010 the percentage of non-voted special indebtedness projects is projected to exceed the median level for other ‘AAA’ states and even the median level for ‘AA’ states.”  Not good news. More reasons to break government’s addiction to special indebtedness borrowing and ensure that all questions concerning the public purse are decided only by a vote of the people.

Malkin on the Stimulus Package

Michelle Malkin hits a home run with her take on the proposed stimulus package.  Tons of great thoughts,  here's one:

I’m all for the government giving me back my money. But why not drop the economic stimulus pretense? Just give me back my money. If the government can spare these “rebates” and send them back now, why did they take the money in the first place? Forget this temporary candy. Why not make this “rebate” permanent?

Preach on, sister!

State Employee Benefits: Another Government Burden to Hit Taxpayers

First we're told that Social Security and Medicare are facing bankruptcy, now we learn that taxpayers will be on the hook for yet another case of shortsighted government fiscal irresponsibility.

The Washington Post informs us that

"According to a new analysis by the Pew Charitable Trusts' Center on the States, states owe employees about $2.73 trillion for pension and health-care costs, much of which is unfunded."

Unfortunately, the article doesn't say how much is unfunded, but let's do some quick math. Assume that half of the $2.73 trillion is unfunded, that gives us $1.365 trillion. To put that into perspective, there are currently 303.6 million people currently in the US (according to the US Census). That means every man, woman and child is facing a bill of roughly $4,500 to pay for the collective state liabilities. That adds up to $18,000 per family of four (and this doesn't even include thousands of local government liabilities).

I've written about North Carolina's situation recently.

Social Security, Medicare, state employee pensions and health benefits...what's next? Is there any doubt that if "universal health care" is put in the hands of these same folks, the results will be anything else but financial disaster?

State Benefits: A Ticking Time-Bomb

This Greensboro News & Record article by our own Brian Balfour is a must-read for anyone concerned about North Carolina's unfunded liability. What's that? Read it.
-Max Borders

Wake County Bonds: Thanks a lot!

Looks like it just got even more expensive to live in Wake County. Our local government continues to rake in windfall tax revenues from all of the new residents, but still insists on spending beyond its means. Issuing debt to pay for such things as open space (which will even further drive up the cost of housing, and therefore our property taxes), libraries and Wake Tech shows just how far our government has extended beyond its actual role in society. That the lives of hundreds of thousands of families will now be worse off because local politicians want to look like they "care about the community" is insulting at best.

One voter had this to say:

Laura Owens, 58, said she considered all of the projects worthwhile even though she had reservations about the number of bond measures on the ballot in recent years.

"I don't know where they're going to get the money," Owens said

Well, Laura, I can tell you where they'll get the money: out of our pockets. Never to be satisfied with the amount of other people's money he gets to spend, Tony Gurley, chairman of the Wake Board of Commissioners, basically promised another bond coming our way within the next two years, this one potentially totaling a billion dollars.

Asked what he thought of a major school bond issue possibly appearing on a Wake County ballot by 2009, however, Gurley said, "I'd put the odds at 100 percent."

If folks like commissioner Gurley are going to continue to take food off my table in order to finance their lust for spending, the least they can do is send me a thank you card.

See-Through Pork

A bunch of people marched on Washington this weekend to fight against pork spending. We asked congress to give us more transparency when it comes to earmarks. Check out the video.

Googled from Behind

If you haven't had a chance yet, please take time to read this article in today's News & Observer updating the Google project in Caldwell County.  If this doesn't emphasize how fundamentally flawed the incentive shell game is, I don't know what will.

It turns out that after waiving Google's property taxes for the next 30 years, the Caldwell County Commissioners turned around and raised property taxes on everyone else by 22.2%!

Unbelievable.

Hopefully as more things like this are revealed, the tide will begin to turn on this incentive game.  Would Caldwell County residents still have supported the Google deal if they knew their property tax bills were going up by nearly one-fourth? I guess they'll have a referendum on that next fall when those Commissioners stand for re-election.

A sign of things to come?

Virginia Governor Tim Kaine announced today that the state is facing a $641 million budget shortfall next year and is asking state agencies to cut their budgets 5%.

Similarly, Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley says his state is facing a $1.5 billion shortfall.

Both Governors lay blame on the slowing housing market and over-zealous projections of revenue growth and the resulting spending that is now coming back to haunt them.

Obviously there are lessons to be learned for North Carolina, unfortunately those lessons only come after the leadership of the General Assembly increased spending 9.5% and issued over $500 million in non-voter authorized debt.

So, will there be a budget shortfall for North Carolina when the General Assembly returns next May?  Even if our housing market has been somewhat isolated from the national slowdown, you have to figure that the irresponsible budgeting over the past two years will come back to haunt us sometime real soon.

Pork Spending: Schofield's Screed

Schofield over at Policy Watch can't even let our pork report go without shrieking his objections. In his "reality check," he attempts to compensate for his lack of intellectual firepower by thumbing through his thesaurus and including as many inflammatory adjectives he can find. Here is the final tally:

Schofield describing our ideology: "Far Right," "extreme, market fundamentalist right," "cramped and bizarre worldview" 

Schofield describing the pork report: "half-baked," "misidentify and mischaracterize," "recklessly tarring," "harmful libel," "absurd," "just plain wrong," "attack," "slimed," "flat wrong," "sloppy and inaccurate attacks," "Ill-conceived," "obvious and egregious errors," "slapdash, ideological diatribe"

It seems to me he needs to cloak his "analysis" with such flowery language in order to assure himself he possesses exclusive rights as a moral authority, and anyone he disagrees with should be either silenced or shamed.

Oddly enough, he barely stops short of defending wasteful government spending on the grounds that "waste, fraud and abuse have always been with us." So I guess it should just continue? Not very "progressive" to advocate the status quo.

He continues:

Think that waste is only a phenomenon of government? Then read some of the descriptions of the lavish spending practiced by America’s new “imperial CEO’s” or the vast sums that cycle through our bloated pharmaceutical industry.

What he doesn't understand is the fact that the market punishes excess on the part of private companies. Such CEO's end up in jail, are fired, or punished by fed-up consumers who are free to spend their money elsewhere. What happens when government wastes money? It simply rewards itself with more of our tax dollars.

The main point that needs to be made is this: Collectivists such as Schofield do not hesitate when advocating the use of force by government to take tax dollars and divert them to projects and causes they deem "worthy." He defends items we identified in the report as pork on the basis that he deems them "worthy initiatives." Guess what, there are countless other nonprofits devoted to very worthy causes that don't receive tax dollars. In fact, I can think of several I would prefer to support - and this list likely wouldn't include any of Michaux's pet groups who are happy to engage in political quid pro quo. Even if we were to suppose that government may justifiably support non-profit organizations, wouldn't it be better to have a comprehensive (competitive) grant process rather than allowing certain politicians to divert funds to their favored organizations?

What people like me with "bizarre worldviews" oppose is a government that has such omnipotence to decide for us which causes are worthy, and then take our money by force in order to fund them. Where is the social justice in that?

Schofield exemplifies hypocrisy by claiming our Pork Report should be labeled "things we don't like" and then goes on to defend certain items because they are "things he likes." Some reality check. Our point is not that we "don't like" such causes, it's that we want to be free to choose for ourselves which causes are worthy of support. Never mind that it's dangerous for nonprofits to become dependent on the government for funding - a dependency that will cause them to become complacent, less responsive to those in need and less innovative.

Special Provisions in the Budget

In today's N&O, Dan Kane fleshes out the story behind one of the special provisions that were added into the budget behind closed doors and never debated before a committee.

Well, that is just one of more than 100 new items inserted in the budget.  Take a look at this report we compiled last week on the full list of special provisions. 

Jim Black's prison door hasn't even been shut and locked and the General Assembly is back to doing the exact same things that led him down the road to corruption.  So much for cleaning up the process.  The lip service given to ending the corruption lasted about half a session.

The 2007 Legislative Session: What should they have done?

What did the General Assembly fail to do that they should have done in this session? (This can include bills not passed, or bills not drafted.)

Comments wide open...

Pork Report

They'll try to raise taxes to fix N.C. bridges and pay for the health insurance of middle class children. But there'll be plenty of bacon they could cut instead. Check out Brian Balfour's pork report here (pdf).

Budget & Budget Rules Broken

This legislative recap that should be of interest to all concerned citizens.

Sticker Shock

Under the Dome has a good post on the growth of budget and government.

Property Rights: Still No Eminent Domain Bill in NC

While members of the Democrat-controlled General Assembly are patting themselves on the back for their "compromise budget", no one seems to be moving on a Constitutional Amendment to ban use of eminent domain for private ends.

Non-presidential candidate Fred Thompson has a blog post on the problem that's getting lots of attention, and a Google News search reveals quite a few municipalities raising hell about megalomaniacal bureaucrats in bed with developers. According to Thompson's post, California just used eminent domain to develop condos -- a plan that will have the government taking over 600 properties and giving them to private moguls. North Carolina is not immune to such possibilities, either, unless the General Assembly acts. But they are sitting on their hands. (I wonder why.)

Budget Blues

The latest North Carolina budget increases spending nearly ten percent over the last. Ten percent. That is not sustainable. Say goodbye to the relative prosperity our state has enjoyed over the last decade or so. It won't last at this rate. (Here's a list of some of the goodies certain interests will get at your expense.)

Pig Pickin'

In the timeless nattering of the politician (quoted from this piece by Democrat handmaidens WRAL):

"Some people are not going to be happy, but they go home and say, 'I didn't want this, but how could I vote against my university getting a new building they so desperately needed or I supported teacher raises and I support insurance for children,'" said Sen. Linda Garrou, D-Forsyth, one of the chief budget negotiators.

Desperately needed buildings like what?  A new university library that will cost double by the time the full debt is paid? A library that will be obsolete by the time its built, much less paid for (Google is currently digitizing Harvard's library right now.) Or how about another student union? This wonderful compromise budget has $500 million in COPs and $300 million in capital spending for all these desperately needed goodies. Among the transfer tax, the Medicaid Swap, and the now-permanent "temporary" tax, where was the compromise? Oh, it was a compromise among legislators about where all the pork went.

Meanwhile the left whines incessantly about “special interests” giving $4,000 contributions to campaigns.  But that’s a drop in the bucket when budget writers can give you millions in pork to secure your vote. Sickening.

Great Time for a Transfer Tax

The Dow loses 300 points (2 percent of its value) in a day amid concerns about sliding home sales. A perfect time for the General Assembly to invite counties to impose transfer taxes -- one of the compromises struck in this biennial budget deal. Thanks to our legislators, there are more cuts to bleed us from. Now, the housing market is still good in Wake County, for example, but it may not be for long. Nevertheless, I'd bet the equity in my home that Wake County residents will be stripped of a portion of their home equity very soon.

The leeches are also making "temporary" taxes permanent. Were they ever temporary to begin with?  How these people keep getting elected is beyond me. North Carolina voters are either sheep, or asleep. -Max Borders

They're Close

Isaac Hunter's Tavern reports that the General Assembly is close to hammering out a budget. Evils to be sure... but by what degree? We'll soon see. -MB

Fitzsimon's Folly

It is a typical strategy for those on the Left to demonize their opponents. This, in fact, is pretty much the sole purpose of the “Friday Follies” column written by Chris Fitzsimon for NC Policy Watch. This demonization is the necessary consequence of a political philosophy that undermines rational discourse precisely because it denies the existence of absolute truth. In short, a philosophically consistent leftist is also a moral relativist – which, of course, is not to say that every leftist journalist is philosophically consistent.

In any case, the most recent Friday Follies column attacks Civitas for referring to North Carolina’s Medicaid program as a “Cadillac” program. The description, in fact, does not originate with Civitas, but was used by the Lewin Group to characterize the state’s Medicaid program. The Lewin Group is not a conservative think tank, but an independent consulting and management firm hired by the General Assembly to evaluate the state’s Medicaid system. Lewin’s 2001 report concluded:

"North Carolina’s Medicaid benefit package includes a number of benefits not offered by an overwhelming number of state Medicaid programs. Topping this list is the generous length of North Carolina’s therapeutic leave policy at nursing homes (60 paid days a year to keep an empty bed reserved for a resident), and the chiropractic and podiatry benefits. These benefits assist many people, and we are not here recommending the termination of these benefits. We do, however, recommend reevaluating whether North Carolina should pare back where it exceeds the 'average' state Medicaid program, such as in these benefits."

It is reasonable to wonder why North Carolina’s Medicaid program is so much more expensive than those programs offered by other states. It is clear, however, that Fitzsimon is not interested in engaging in such a dialogue. If he were, Fitzsimon would have addressed the main point of the article – the transfer tax. For Fitzsimon, an article on the transfer tax that includes one sentence referring to North Carolina’s high level of covered optional services is “Medicaid bashing.”

According to Fitzsimon, Civitas “bashes” Medicaid because Medicaid helps poor people. It seems Fitzsimon thinks we here at Civitas hate poor people. In order to appease his conscience and avoid any rational analysis of opposing viewpoints, he must assign evil and sinister intentions to anyone who disagrees with his vision of government. The fact that Fitzsimon must resort to such petty insinuations reveals how weak his argument really is.

Brian Balfour and Jameson Taylor

Listen to the Man

Richard Moore is right about COPs. 

Reverse supplanting of funds?

The more you read these budget bills, the more little golden nuggets you can find.

Included in the Senate budget is $37.5 million in recurring funds for "class size reduction" to maintain the 18:1 student/teacher ratio in grades K-3.

But wait, I thought the North Carolina "Education" Lottery was supposed to cover that cost.  Apparently, since all of us didn't buy enough lottery tickets, the Senate decided we should be on the hook for the money anyway.

Now, we can debate studies about whether class size reduction has any effect on student performance, (I tend to think it is more of a jobs program for the Teachers' Union), but everyone should be in agreement now that the lottery funding formula absolutely must be changed.

This is what happens when the lottery - a non-recurring, variable source of income - is used to pay for recurring expenses (teachers' salaries and students).  When too few people play the lottery, the rest of us get stuck with the bill.

Mini Budget Debate

John Hood tries to explain some of the nuances of fiscal responsibility and infrastructure development to someone steeped in what you might call "more-spending macroeconomics". See the comments section, too.

Cola or Cherry?

As I was reading through the House and Senate passed budgets over the weekend drawing up some comparisons, I noticed a nice little slush fund for the DOT board...

FUNDS FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, SPOT SAFETY, AND TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECTS

SECTION 27.3. Of the funds appropriated by this act to the Department of Transportation in fiscal year 2007-2008, nine million three hundred thirty-eight thousand four hundred four dollars ($9,338,404) shall be used for economic development transportation projects recommended by the member of the Board of Transportation representing the Division in which the project is to be constructed in consultation with the Division Engineer and approved by the Board of Transportation. These funds, in addition to any remaining funds which were appropriated to the Department pursuant to Section 28.27 of S.L. 2005-276, shall be allocated equally among the 14 Divisions.

The Secretary of Transportation shall not prevent or delay the implementation of any projects approved by the Board of Transportation pursuant to this section.

The Senate version which gives each member approximately $667,000 while the House version gives each BOT member $1 million.  Basically, each of the 14 members of the Board of Transportation gets a nice little chunk of money to use for "economic development" in his or her region.   

Hmm... I wonder how much it would cost to get the road repaved in front of my house?

Budgetary Steps Away from Statism?

Rob Schofield's lamentations notwithstanding, if the rumors were right, the budget would've turned out better than we thought. Read Schofield's whole post. Most of these rumored proposals strike this eye as pretty positive - particularly the pilot program designed to marketize Medicaid (I imagine similar to the one in Florida). That would have been a good idea.

Why "progressives" are so enamored of the undynamic, sclerotic, expensive, bureaucratic government systems that keep poor people dependent and distort the healthcare market is beyond me. They've bought fully the statist party line about "market failure", I guess. But leaving the Medicaid status quo is positively Soviet (and certainly not progressive in any lexical sense). I'd really like to see Adam Searing and Rob Schofield get full scholarships to graduate degrees programs in economics. They'd likely turn out like a couple of Paul Krugmans, but at least they would be able to grasp that a) Medicaid is fiscally unsustainable and gobbling up more and more of state budgets (we do need roads ya know), b) that Medicaid contributes to the very poverty traps you'd think progressives would like for poor people to escape, and c) that it distorts the market in such a way that sends more and more people into it. Then again, c) is their goal -- single payer. But hopefully that economics degree would disabuse them of those notions, too.  Alas, alas. Such is the redistributionist, zero-sum thinking of the left.

(Update: We could find nothing in the budget to justify Schofield's fears. Leftism lives another day.)

The Arrogance and Elitism of the Bureaucrat

... was exemplified in these words by Senator Marc Basnight, quoted in the Insider:

"We took a big step in building a knowledge-based economy," said Basnight, D-Dare, adding that a vote of the people wasn't a must because the projects are so important. (Emphasis added.)

I know it looks like we're picking on Basnight, but he is one of the most powerful members of the General Assembly and he should take it on the chin. (Please, no horseheads in my bed.)

Seriously, though, what sort of arrogance and elitist thinking goes into a claim that: billions in debt should bypass a referrendum of the people, that he and his technocrat cronies know how to build a "knowledge economy", much less, that he knows the first thing about the money he's spending, where it's going, and its effects on the economy? I don't know what should sicken taxpayers more, the "we know better than you" mien, or all the debt set at the feet of our children (sure to cancel whatever positive effects may rise out of their subsidized education). -MB