Voice For Liberty

Tag: Government spending

  • Kansas and Wichita quick takes: Wednesday June 1, 2011

    Transportation planning. It’s been the assumption in America over the last half-century that transportation needs — roads, bridges, buses, subways, etc. — must be planned by government in a top-down fashion. But the Cato Institute’s Randal O’Toole disagrees: “Should transportation be funded and planned from the top down or bottom up? Top-down advocates, such as the Brookings Institution’s Robert Puentes (writing in the May 23, 2011 Wall Street Journal) argue that only central planners can have a ‘clear-cut vision for transportation’ that will allow them to target spending ‘to make sure all those billions of dollars help achieve our economic and environmental goals.’ Advocates of bottom-up funding, such as the Cato Institute, Reason Foundation and Heritage Foundation, respond that public and private transportation providers better serve our needs when they are responsive to the fees people pay for various forms of transportation. In fact, most of the problems with transportation today, from an antiquated air-traffic control system to deteriorating bridges to empty transit buses, are due to top-down planning.” O’Toole goes on to explain the problems with federal funding of local transportation projects, concluding “No matter how well intentioned, top-down transportation planning quickly turns into a combination of social engineering and pork barrel. It is time to return to a bottom-up funding system that rewards transport agencies and companies for reducing costs and increasing mobility.” … In Wichita, the bus transit system is running a deficit, and the city manager has warned that cuts to service may be made. Most people would be surprised that in 2009, the fares paid by passengers covered just 22.5 percent of the bus system’s total cost, according to Michael Vinson, Director of Transit for the City of Wichita. The Wichita Eagle recently reported the figure as just 20 percent. The rest of the cost is covered by a variety of local, state, and federal grants. … Is it a coincidence that Wichita’s bus service is a top-down government-planned service? And what does this foretell for the future of other government-planned and provided transit, which is said by government planners like the Wichita Downtown Development Corporation to be necessary for the revitalization of downtown Wichita

    Pompeo, Huelskamp ‘no’ on debt limit. U.S. Representative Mike Pompeo, a Wichita Republican serving his first term, voted “no” to increasing the U.S. federal debt limit, which currently is about $14.3 trillion dollars. In a statement, Pompeo said; “I voted no on raising the debt ceiling. No to more debt without a change in behavior. No to increasing the credit card limit when the Obama Administration has zero commitment to reducing the unsustainable rate of spending. No to business as usual in Washington, D.C. … With this debt ceiling vote, my colleagues and I are putting down a marker on behalf of the American people. Americans have rejected the status quo and sent me along with 86 other Republican Freshmen to Congress to reverse course. Earlier this year, the President presented a spending plan to Congress for 2012. Unfortunately, that plan proposed 10 straight years of deficits in excess of $1 trillion. That is a recipe for disaster and one which we cannot accept on behalf of the Americans who sent us here to rein in out-of-control government spending.” … In explaining his intent to vote against the bill, Tim Huelskamp, who represents the Kansas first district, said: “The President’s request to increase the debt limit without cutting spending is irresponsible and fiscally reckless, therefore I plan to vote against it. The acquisition of more debt while failing to deal with Washington’s addiction to spending only sustains Washington’s unhealthy behaviors. It puts the country on the path of Greece. We owe it to the American people and to future generations to deal with overspending once and for all.” Lynn Jenkins and Kevin Yoder, the other representatives from Kansas, also voted against raising the debt limit. … Proponents of federal spending insist that we must increase our debt limit or financial markets will tank and economic activity will come to a halt. The Concord Coalition writes: “Approval of a debt limit increase is necessary to maintain the full faith and credit of the United States government. Failure to approve an increase would not be an act of fiscal responsibility, unless it can be said that deadbeats are fiscally responsible because they refuse to pay their bills. It would result in the United States defaulting on the commitments it has already made, including Social Security, Medicare and veterans benefits, vendor payments, tax refunds, student loans and interest payments on outstanding debt.” The Cato Institute counters: “A temporarily frozen debt limit could instead signal U.S. lawmakers’ resolve to get our fiscal house in order. It may even reassure investors about long-term U.S. economic prospects. … For too long, analysts and politicians have balked at the massive political impediments to reforming the federal budget — especially entitlement programs. Many now concede, actually, that no prudential reforms are likely unless there is an imminent ‘crisis.’ On the other hand, political liberals argue that there is no real ‘crisis’ — and so no need for real reforms. … Indeed, investors should be fearful of the opposite: an increase in the debt limit without a serious challenge from reform-minded lawmakers. This only signals business as usual for U.S. fiscal affairs.”

    This Week in Kansas. Recently the KAKE Television public affairs program This Week in Kansas started placing episodes on its website. On the most recent episode, Malcolm Harris and I join host Tim Brown for a discussion of the Kansas Legislature and economic development topics. Also, Meteorologist Jay Prater contributes a segment on storm preparation.

    Kingman is the first. The office of Kansas Governor Sam Brownback has announced that Kingman County, just to the west of Wichita, is the first county to participate in the new Rural Opportunity Zone student loan repayment program. This program allows residents who move into counties with declining population to escape paying state income taxes for five years. In deciding to participate in the student loan repayment program, the county and the state will participate equally in repaying student loans of up to $15,000 for college graduates who move to Kingman County. … In a statement, the governor said “I am pleased Kingman County commissioners recognize the direct benefit of partnering with the state to attract college graduates to their community. This aggressive policy move is targeted to grow our shrinking rural counties. Like the Homestead Act, ROZ offers opportunity instead of handpicking winners and losers.” While almost all welcome the ROZ program — the legislation passed 102 to 18 in the House and 34 to 5 in the Senate — the nostalgia for the glory days of small-town Kansas may not be in our best interests. In his paper Embracing Dynamism: The Next Phase in Kansas Economic Development Policy, which has influenced Governor Brownback’s economic policy, Dr. Art Hall wrote that productivity — which should be our ultimate goal — is related to population density: “Productivity growth is the ultimate goal of economic development. Productivity growth — the volume and value of output per worker — drives the growth of wages and wealth. Productivity growth results from a risky trial and error process on the front lines of individual businesses, which is why Kansas economic development strategy should focus on embracing dynamism — a focus virtually indistinguishable from widespread business investment and risk-taking. Productivity growth tends to happen in geographic areas characterized by density. This pattern shows up in Kansas. The dense population centers demonstrate superior productivity growth.”

    Legislature is through for season. Today both the Kansas House of Representatives and Senate met for sine die, a fancy Latin term for its ceremonial last day, although action may be taken. The House made an attempt to override the governor’s line-item veto of funding for the Kansas Arts Commission, but the effort failed by a vote of 50 to 44. Two-thirds, or 84 votes, would be needed to override the veto. The Senate didn’t make an attempt. The next meeting of both chambers of the Kansas Legislature will be on January 9, 2012, although there are many committee meetings during the summer and fall months.

    Stossel looks at energy. In a recent episode of his weekly television show available to view using the free hulu service, John Stossel looks at various forms of energy and asks: Who will keep the lights on? … Early in the show, Stossel argues with Bill O’Reilly over the role of speculators in the run-up of oil prices. O’Reilly favors strict regulation of speculators, believing that the market is rigged. In a discussion with two guests, wild speculation was promoted as the cause of rapidly rising prices, with some trades by traders said to be stoned at the time. But it was mentioned that speculation carries huge risks, and if the speculators are wrong, they lose — and big. For more on speculators, see Speculators selfishly provide a public service.

  • Kansas and Wichita quick takes: Tuesday May 31, 2011

    Pachyderm to feature DA Foulston. This Friday (June 3) the Wichita Pachyderm Club features Nola Tedesco Foulston, District Attorney for the Eighteenth Judicial District of Kansas, whose boundaries are coincident with Sedgwick County. Foulston’s topic will be “An office overview and current events at the Eighteenth Judicial District of Kansas District Attorney’s office.” Foulston, a Democrat, was elected to her office in 1988 and has served continuously since then. … Appearances by speakers other than Republicans at Pachyderm often generate controversy, and this week is no exception. Pachyderm is a Republican club, and the mission statement of the national organization reads: “Promote active citizen involvement and education in government and politics through the formation and support of grassroots, Republican clubs across America.” Some feel that an appearance at Pachyderm will bolster Foulston’s re-election prospects, should she decide to run again next year. Others believe that no Democrat should be be a speaker — ever. In my opinion, the sentiment of the Pachyderm board and of many of the club’s regular attendees is that while Pachyderm is indeed Republican and conservative, the club’s mission of political education and civic engagement allows — in fact, encourages — appearances by prominent officeholders of any political party. In any county, the District Attorney is a powerful force in local government, with broad discretion as to the prosecution of criminal cases. This is a speaker that the members of Pachyderm should be encouraged to hear, even though members may not agree with her politics. …. Foulston will likely face several tough questions from the usually spirited Pachyderm audience. … Upcoming speakers: On June 10, John Allison, Superintendent of USD 259, the Wichita public school district, on “An update from USD 259.” On June 17, The Honorable Lawton R. Nuss, Kansas Supreme Court Chief Justice on “The State of the Kansas Courts.” On June 24, Jim Mason, Naturalist at the Great Plains Nature Center will have a presentation and book signing. Mason is author of Wichita’s Riverside Parks, published in April 2011. On July 1, Jay M. Price, Director of the Public History Program at Wichita State University, speaking on “Classes of Values in Kansas History.” On July 8, Dave Trabert, President, Kansas Policy Institute, on “Stabilizing the Kansas Budget.”

    Sedgwick County Commission. In its Wednesday meeting, the Sedgwick County Commission will consider making two forgivable loans for the purposes of economic development. These loans have become popular with economic development officials, and often the City of Wichita and Sedgwick County make loans of equal amount to the same company. … The program works by loaning the company an amount of money, with the entire amount paid out at once. Then, if performance goals are met over a period of time, the loan (and interest) is forgiven. Otherwise, portions of it, with interest, may become due. Often the term of the loan is four or five years, with a portion of the loan forgiven each year if goals are met. The performance goals are usually the number of full-time or equivalent employees. … The Golf Warehouse in northeast Wichita is asking for a $48,000 forgivable loan. It recently received a loan of that amount from the City of Wichita. Mid-Continent Instrument, Inc. is asking for $10,000. … Usually economic development incentives are accompanied by a cost-benefit study performed by Wichita State University Center for Economic Development and Business Research. The county hasn’t supplied such analysis for these two items.

    Kansas budget signed. On Saturday — a holiday weekend day — Kansas Governor Sam Brownback signed the budget bill. He used his line-item veto authority to strike an across-the-board reduction in spending, preferring to make targeted cuts instead. Although the governor had proposed ending funding for public broadcasting, the legislature included funding, and the governor did not veto it. … Most controversial of the governor’s handful of changes to the bill will be his veto of funding for the Kansas Arts Commission. This action was not a surprise, as recently the administration laid off all the commission’s employees. Associated Press reports that the chairman of the commission isn’t ruling out a lawsuit.

    KPERS suit threatened. Changes made by the Kansas Legislature to Kansas Public Employees Retirement System, or KPERS have caused state employee organizations to consider a lawsuit, according to Associated Press reporting. The changes made this year are mild compared to the changes that must be made if KPERS is ever to become self-sustaining. The threat of a lawsuit over these minor changes doesn’t foretell a future of cooperation from state employees in making the much larger reforms that must be made.

    Stimulus jobs — or not. Malcolm Harris calls attention to an analysis of the job-creation performance of the 2009 stimulus bill. The working paper is titled The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: Public Sector Jobs Saved, Private Sector Jobs Forestalled. Its goal, according to authors Timothy Conley and Bill Dupor, is to “understand the causal effect on employment of the government spending component of the ARRA.” The key finding is this: “Our benchmark point estimates suggest that the ARRA created/saved approximately 450 thousand state and local government jobs and destroyed/forestalled roughly one million private sector jobs.” That’s a net loss of jobs. … The authors note there is “appreciable estimation uncertainty” in the estimates. Still, they are able to conclude: “However, our estimates are precise enough to state that we find no evidence of large positive private-sector job effects.” … The report includes a section summarizing other researchers’ findings, which usually find that the stimulus program created or save many jobs. The studies that find large job creation usually rely on “fiscal policy multipliers,” a Keynesian economics concept.

    Government doesn’t create jobs. Investor’s Business Daily relies partly on the Conley and Dupor paper in its editorial Government Doesn’t Create Jobs. IBD asks “In a joint op-ed with the British prime minister, President Obama admits that jobs are created by an innovative private sector. So why is he strangling ours with regulations, rules and taxes? We would hope it was a candid admission of the truth rather than just boilerplate rhetoric in an op-ed in the Times of London by President Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron. But there it was: ‘Governments do not create jobs; bold people and innovative businesses do.’” Continuing: “For once, the president is spot on. Businesses create jobs to fill a need, and their incentive is profit. Businesses invest; governments can only spend. Businesses create wealth, as do their employees. Government consumes wealth and sucks the economic oxygen out of the room. Its employees create paperwork and regulations that restrict economic growth.”

  • Kansas and Wichita quick takes: Wednesday May 25, 2011

    The failure of American schools. The Atlantic: “Who better to lead an educational revolution than Joel Klein, the prosecutor who took on the software giant Microsoft? But in his eight years as chancellor of New York City’s school system, the nation’s largest, Klein learned a few painful lessons of his own — about feckless politicians, recalcitrant unions, mediocre teachers, and other enduring obstacles to school reform.” Key takeway idea: “As a result, even when making a lifetime tenure commitment, under New York law you could not consider a teacher’s impact on student learning. That Kafkaesque outcome demonstrates precisely the way the system is run: for the adults. The school system doesn’t want to change, because it serves the needs of the adult stakeholders quite well, both politically and financially.” … Also: “Accountability, in most industries or professions, usually takes two forms. First and foremost, markets impose accountability: if people don’t choose the goods or services you’re offering, you go out of business. Second, high-performing companies develop internal accountability requirements keyed to market-based demands. Public education lacks both kinds of accountability. It is essentially a government-run monopoly. Whether a school does well or poorly, it will get the students it needs to stay in business, because most kids have no other choice. And that, in turn, creates no incentive for better performance, greater efficiency, or more innovation — all things as necessary in public education as they are in any other field.” … Overall, an eye-opening indictment of American public schools.

    Professors to Koch Brothers: Take your green back. In The Wall Street Journal Donald Luskin takes a look at what should be a non-controversy: A gift by the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation to Florida State University to endow a program to study the foundations of prosperity, social progress, and human well-being — at the Stavros Center for the Advancement of Free Enterprise and Economic Education. (Sounds like a good match.) Writes Luskin: “Then there’s the donors. One of the donors, according to the two professors, is known for his ‘efforts to influence public policy, elections, taxes, environmental issues, unions, regulations, etc.’ Whom might they be referring to? Certainly not George Soros — there’s never an objection to that billionaire’s donations, which always tend toward the political left. No, it’s Charles and David Koch, owners of Koch Industries.” … Critics say the gift is an assault on academic freedom. Luskin counters: “The issue at FSU isn’t that the university has bargained away its academic freedom. The problem is that FSU has exercised its academic freedom in a way that the political left disapproves of. As [FSU College of Social Sciences] Mr. Rasmussen put it to the St. Petersburg Times: ‘If somebody says, ‘We’re willing to help support your students and faculty by giving you money, but we’d like you to read this book,’ that doesn’t strike me as a big sin. What is a big sin is saying that certain ideas cannot be discussed.”

    History and legacy of Kansas populism. Recently Friends University Associate Professor of Political Science Russell Arben Fox delivered a lecture to the Wichita Pachyderm Club that was well-received by members. Now Fox has made his presentation available on his blog In Media Res. It’s titled The History and Legacy of Kansas Populism. Thank you to Professor Fox for this effort, and also to Pachyderm Club Vice President John Todd, who arranges the many excellent programs like this that are characteristic of the club.

    Federal grants seen to raise future local spending. “Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program.” — Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman (The Yale Book of Quotations, 2006) Is this true? Do federal grants cause state and/or local tax increases in the future after the government grant ends? Economists Russell S. Sobel and George R. Crowley examine the evidence and find the answer is yes. The conclusion to their research paper Do Intergovernmental Grants Create Ratchets in State and Local Taxes? Testing the Friedman-Sanford Hypothesis states: “Our results clearly demonstrate that grant funding to state and local governments results in higher own source revenue and taxes in the future to support the programs initiated with the federal grant monies. Our results are consistent with Friedman’s quote regarding the permanence of temporary government programs started through grant funding, as well as South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford’s reasoning for trying to deny some federal stimulus monies for his state due to the future tax implications. Most importantly, our results suggest that the recent large increase in federal grants to state and local governments that has occurred as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) will have significant future tax implications at the state and local level as these governments raise revenue to continue these newly funded programs into the future. Federal grants to state and local governments have risen from $461 billion in 2008 to $654 billion in 2010. Based on our estimates, future state taxes will rise by between 33 and 42 cents for every dollar in federal grants states received today, while local revenues will rise by between 23 and 46 cents for every dollar in federal (or state) grants received today. Using our estimates, this increase of $200 billion in federal grants will eventually result in roughly $80 billion in future state and local tax and own source revenue increases. This suggests the true cost of fiscal stimulus is underestimated when the costs of future state and local tax increases are overlooked.” … An introduction to the paper is here.

    Debt observed as sold. New U.S. Representative Tim Huelskamp, who represents the Kansas first district, recently observed the Bureau of Public Debt electronically sell debt obligations of the United States of America. In a press release, the Congressman said: “In a matter of minutes, I observed the United States sell $30.4 billion more in debt. The ease with which this transaction was done reminded me that it is just too simple for Washington to acquire, buy, sell and trade debt.” As to the upcoming decision as to whether to raise the ability of the U.S. to borrow: “As Congress considers yet another increase in the debt limit, the only responsible option that exists is to put America on a path to fiscal responsibility with clear limits on spending. Democrats say they want a debt limit increase that is ‘clean’ without any of the budget cuts we have proposed. Yet, they have offered no plan to eliminate annual trillion-dollar deficits. There is nothing ‘clean’ about increasing the limit without tackling the massive deficits and ever-increasing debt. … With nearly one-half of the nation’s debt held by foreign countries, including more than $1.1 trillion by China, our national security is threatened as well. Too many of our freedoms and liberties are threatened when Americans owe trillions of dollars to nations who put their interests before ours.”

  • Federal debt limit seen as test of resolve

    Cato Institute video: “Will raising the debt limit signal to markets what we want? Or will it signal an unwillingness to deal with tough decisions on spending and debt in the near term? Cato Institute Senior Fellow Jagadeesh Gokhale suggests that refusing to raise the debt limit (until programs like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are reformed) could signal to markets a greater willingness to deal with long-term fiscal issues sooner rather than later.”

  • Kansas and Wichita quick takes: Wednesday May 11, 2011

    Kansas Arts Commission layoffs. Kansas Governor Sam Brownback has dismissed all the employees of the Kansas Arts Commission. Earlier this year, the governor issued an order disbanding the commission, but the Senate reversed that order. The House had withheld funding for the commission, but recently reversed its position and added funding. The action by the governor, along with his line-item veto power, appears to end the life of the commission. … Government-funded arts supporters used a number of arguments and an aggressive lobbying campaign to make their case for funding. In the end, their arguments are like that of most others who plead for government funding — “the special pleading of selfish interests” that Henry Hazlitt identified. He also wrote of “… the persistent tendency of men to see only the immediate effects of a given policy, or its effects only on a special group, and to neglect to inquire what the long-run effects of that policy will be not only on that special group but on all groups. It is the fallacy of overlooking secondary consequences.” For more, see Kansas governor should veto arts commission funding, Arts supporters make case in Kansas Senate committee, and Arts funding in Kansas.

    Sculpture spending in Wichita. Yesterday the Wichita City Council voted four to three to spend $350,000 on a large sculpture at WaterWalk in downtown Wichita. The fact that the sculpture will be paid for with tax increment financing funds was used as an argument for proceeding with the expense, as the money is already allocated and can’t be used outside the TIF district. But, there’s nothing that requires the money be spent. … Council Member Michael O’Donnell said it is an “audacious” amount of money at a time of financial difficulty, and added that “I think it could set the arts back instead of propelling it forward because people would see that as a waste of government money.” He suggested tabling the idea until the economy improves as a way to “highlight fiscal responsibility that this council needs to show.” … If the benefit of the sculpture to WaterWalk is large, it seems that the WaterWalk developers would have an incentive to build it on their own. Except, being a public-private partnership, it’s sort of hard to tell where public subsidy ends and private ownership begins. … Not mentioned was the fact that the sculpture site is nearly next door to where the Wichita city manager owns a residence, and whether this requires that the spending and surrounding deliberations be handled in a special way.

    How much more can we soak the rich? Writes Jennifer Rubin: In the wake of Osama bin Laden’s killing a significant tax story did not get much notice. The Wall Street Journal reported this week that “a new congressional study concludes that the percentage of U.S. households owing no federal income tax climbed to 51% for 2009.” After presenting some figures that illustrate the progressivity of the American income tax system, she concludes: “There are legitimate arguments about how progressive our tax system should be; at what level of taxation do we risk impeding economic growth and which goals we want to promote through the tax code (e.g. family economic stability, home ownership, investment)? But we should at least be clear on the facts and our starting point. We can’t solve the debt problem by grabbing more money from the rich. And we simply don’t have, as Obama asserts, a tax system that undertaxes the rich.”

    School reform in Kansas, this year’s edition. From the Kansas Association of School Boards, on the major piece of school reform legislation this year: “HB 2191 passed 106-16. It will allow teachers to agree to extend their three-year probationary period by one or two additional years. The school board must provide a plan of assistance and give the teacher time to consider the special contract.” … Tinkering with the teacher tenure formula is all that has been accomplished this year regarding school reform. This is in a state that ranks very low among the states in policies relating to teacher effectiveness, according to the National Council on Teacher Quality.

    Wichita teacher cuts. Speaking of policies that work against teacher effectiveness: USD 259, the Wichita public school district has announced that it will reduce the number of teachers next year. The district’s contract with the union requires that teachers be laid off in order of seniority, so that new teachers are let go first. If the district was able to lay off their least effective teachers first, the district could end up with a smaller, but more effective, teacher workforce. … It might seem like automatically retaining the most experienced teachers is a beneficial policy. But research tells us that longevity in the classroom is not related to teacher effectiveness. One study found results that are typical: “There appear to be important gains in teaching quality in the first year of experience and smaller gains over the next few career years. However, there is little evidence that improvements continue after the first three years.” … Identifying effective teachers is something that many school districts have trouble doing, to the point where it makes one wonder if they are really interested in knowing. Kansas, as a state, has poor policies on evaluating teacher effectiveness. … The work rules that prevent school districts from dismissing ineffective teachers first are courtesy of the teachers unions, and are another reason why these institutions are harmful to the children they purport to serve.

    Real estate to be topic at Pachyderm, followed by tours. This Friday (May 13) the Wichita Pachyderm Club features Craig Burns and Glenn Edwards of Security 1st Title Company speaking on the topic “Real Estate Transactions, Ownership, Title, and Tales From the Trenches.” Following the event will be optional tours at the Sedgwick County Courthouse for presentations by Bill Meek, Register of Deeds from 2:00 pm to 2:25 pm, Kelly Arnold, County Clerk from 2:30 pm to 2:55 pm, and Linda Kizzire, County Treasurer from 3:00 pm to 3:30 pm. … The public is welcome and encouraged to attend Wichita Pachyderm meetings. For more information click on Wichita Pachyderm Club. … Upcoming speakers: On May 20, Rob Siedleckie, Secretary, Kansas Social Rehabilitation Services (SRS) on the topic “The SRS and Initiatives.” On May 27, Todd Tiahrt, Former 4th District Congressman on the topic “Outsourcing our National Security — How the Pentagon is Working Against Us”.

    Immigration. From LearnLiberty.org, a project of Institute for Humane Studies: “Is it true that immigration raises the U.S. unemployment rate? Is it true that immigration affects U.S. income distribution? The conventional wisdom says that both of these things are true. However, economist Antony Davies says there is evidence to suggest that they are not. Looking at the data, there is no relationship between the rate of immigration and the unemployment rate, nor is there a relationship between the rate of immigration and income inequality. Further, there is evidence to suggest that immigrants actually create more American jobs.”

  • Kansas needs large ending balance

    Negotiations between Kansas House and Senate budget committees are stalled due to differing opinions on how large an ending balance the budget should have, if it should have any balance at all.

    We need to have a large ending balance for two reasons: First, the larger the ending balance, the lower the planned spending. Kansas government needs to spend less. While proponents of a small ending balance (which is the same as wanting to spend more) make their case with images of closed schools and abandoned senior citizens, the state is spending a lot of money that could be shifted to these programs.

    Second, in recent years the legislature has left too small an ending balance, and the governor has had to make allotments, or spending adjustments. This has been the case because revenue incoming to the state was lower than expected. Legislators construct the budget based on forecasts from the state’s consensus revenue estimating group. These forecasts, of course, are subject to error and all sorts of uncertainty that can’t be forecast. The group has had a tendency to overestimate future revenue recently, as shown in the chart below.

    If this trend of overestimating continues — and we don’t know if it will — a budget with a small ending balance will probably force spending cuts to be made mid-year. It would be better if we planned for them now.

    Kansas Consensus Revenue Estimating Group Error

    The chart shows the percent error between the consensus revenue estimating group’s initial estimate of revenue for a year and the actual results. It seems that the group has a tendency to underestimate the magnitude of the swing of actual results, both good and bad. During the recession years of the early 2000s, the group was too high in its estimates (leading to a negative error percentage). Then during the following boom years the group underestimated. For the past two years the group forecast much more revenue than the state actually received, leading to some of its largest errors, in relative terms.

  • Kansas and Wichita quick takes: Wednesday May 4, 2011

    Stripper bill III Ric Anderson of the Topeka Capital-Journal looks at some of the issues surrounding the “Community Defense Act,” which applies broad regulation to strip clubs. This year the serious issue of human trafficking has been used to promote this bill as necessary. Anderson pokes some large holes in that argument, most notably: “But if authorities know the problem [underage girls stripping] is happening and also know where it’s taking place, why haven’t they been able to stop it?” … The bill has passed the House but not the Senate. … Beside regulation of behavior inside strip clubs, the bill regulates everyone in a way that is unacceptable: “No person shall establish a sexually oriented business within 1,000 feet of any preexisting accredited public or private elementary or secondary school, house of worship, state-licensed day care facility, public library, public park, residence or other sexually oriented business.” These entities don’t have, and should not be given, the right to choose their neighbors. … House Republicans bucking leadership and voting — correctly — against this bill include Clay Aurand, Mike Burgess, Lana Gordon, Willie Prescott, Charles Roth, Sharon Schwartz, Tom Sloan, Kay Wolf, and Ron Worley.

    Arts Commission funding in. It appears that funding for the Kansas Arts Commission will make its way into the budget that will be presented to Kansas Governor Sam Brownback. Now the governor faces a test: will he use his line-item veto power to cancel this funding? Brownback issued an Executive Reorganization Order that would have killed the commission, but the Kansas Senate, using its power to do so, overrode the order. But with the veto pen, the governor can still accomplish the same effect. See Kansas governor should veto arts commission funding.

    Sunshine needed on public pensions and benefits. Investor’s Business Daily: As debates heat up in states across the country over budget shortfalls, more and more focus is being placed upon the runaway growth in health and pension benefits for state and local government workers. These excessive benefits are a major factor behind the exploding costs of government in many states. It is time to bring these costs under control before they completely overwhelm state and local budgets. … negotiations between governments and public sector unions lack transparency and accountability. Taxpayers are rarely made aware of the costly promises that public-sector unions are able to extract from state and local governments. Politicians often find it easier to reward unions with deferred payments for pensions and health care instead of offering salary or wage increases that appear immediately on the budget. Thus they are able to buy peace today by selling out the future.” … In Kansas, news media and editorial writers don’t help citizens learn the full magnitude of the problem, as few refer to the actual unfunded balance in KPERS, the Kansas Public Employees Retirement System.

    Beyond the debt ceiling headlines. Will the country default on its debt if its ability to borrow more is not extended? Bankrupting America looks at the issue in the video Beyond the debt ceiling headlines. … Cutting spending is the key to avoiding default.

  • Kansas Chamber finds voters favor cuts, not tax increases to balance budget

    A survey of Kansas voters conducted on behalf of the Kansas Chamber of Commerce found widespread support for cutting spending rather than raising taxes as the way to balance the Kansas budget. Support was also found for cutting state worker salaries, or reducing the number of state employees.

    The survey was conducted on April 21 and 25 by Cole Hargrave Snodgrass & Associates, Inc. of Oklahoma City. 500 registered voters participated. The survey margin of error is given as 4.3 percent. The company says respondents were balanced for geographic region, gender, and partisan registration.

    One question asked respondents’ opinion of the general course of the state: “Generally speaking, do you think that things in Kansas are going in the right direction or do you think that things have pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track?” 31 percent responded “right track,” while 47 percent said “wrong track” with the remainder undecided.

    As a point of comparison, a recent Rasmussen poll asked a similar question of voters across the country. 71 percent said the country is heading down the wrong track, with 21 percent saying the country is headed in the right direction.

    When presented with the fact that Kansas is faced with a $500 million budget shortfall, 13 percent said the state should raise taxes, 69 percent said to cut spending, and 18 percent were undecided among these options.

    The survey found widespread support for cutting spending across demographic groups. Among self-identified liberals, 56 percent said to cut spending, with 27 percent wanting to raise taxes. Of those in homes with less than $40,000 income, 75 percent said cut spending, with nine percent in favor of raising taxes. For respondents who favored reelecting President Barack Obama, cutting spending was favored by 48 percent, with only 28 percent of those in favor of tax increases. For those who disapprove of the job Governor Sam Brownback is doing, the numbers were similar, with spending cuts favored 43 percent to 33 percent wanting tax hikes.

    The issue of possible pay cuts for state employees has been considered by the Legislature and has been in the news. The survey asked this question with the following results:

    It has been discussed that state employees may be forced
to take a pay cut in order to balance the budget.
Which of the following best describes how you 
think the state deal with this situation?
State emp. salaries should not be cut            13%
State emp. salaries should be cut up to 3%       17%
State emp. salaries should be cut 3 to 5%        16%
State emp. salaries should be cut 5 to 10%        3%
State emp. salaries should be cut more than 10%   2%
Instead of cutting salaries, we should cut the
number of state employees                        31%
Undecided (vol.)                                 18%

    In its analysis of the responses to this question, Cole Hargrave wrote “Kansas voters also demonstrate a desire to make real cuts and are not just reacting with an anti-tax sentiment. When asked about how much the salaries of state employees should be cut, only 13% said they should not be cut. Most remarkable is that 31% of voters said that instead of cutting salaries, the total number of state employees should be reduced. Fully 67% of Kansas voters support either elimination of employee positions are at least a 3% cut.”

    The governor’s budget calls for not filling some 2,000 vacant state jobs.

    The survey also asked about attitudes toward state government competing with private sector provision of a service when the private sector is doing a good job. 73 percent of respondents agreed strongly or somewhat that the state should not compete, with 12 percent disagreeing and 16 percent undecided. The survey did not provide respondents with an example of a competitive situation.

    Respondents showed disapproval of the job President Obama is doing, with 28 percent favoring his reelection, and 57 percent desiring someone else to be elected. Governor Brownback fared better, with 49 percent approving to some degree the job he has been doing. 21 percent disapproved to some degree, with 29 percent undecided.

  • Kansas governor should veto arts commission funding

    As the Kansas Legislature returns to work this week, it’s possible that funding for the Kansas Arts Commission could make it into the budget appropriations bill that will eventually be sent to Governor Sam Brownback. If so, the governor should use his discretion and line item veto power to cancel this funding.

    It’s not only a financial matter, although this factor alone is reason enough to cancel this funding. The arguments of supporters of this funding, small amount that it is, illustrate some of the worse aspects of government and public policy.

    Government funded arts supporters promote the government funding as an investment that pays off for Kansas taxpayers. They have studies that say it does. But these studies have little credibility, as shown in Arts funding in Kansas. These studies purportedly show that spending on the arts has a magic power that is not present when people spend their own money on the things they value most highly. But these studies, like most, rely on several economic fallacies. Henry Hazlitt, writing in Economics in One Lesson, explains.

    Economics is haunted by more fallacies than any other study known to man. This is no accident. The inherent difficulties of the subject would be great enough in any case, but they are multiplied a thousandfold by a factor that is insignificant in, say, physics, mathematics or medicine — the special pleading of selfish interests. While every group has certain economic interests identical with those of all groups, every group has also, as we shall see, interests antagonistic to those of all other groups. While certain public policies would in the long run benefit everybody, other policies would benefit one group only at the expense of all other groups. The group that would benefit by such policies, having such a direct interest in them, will argue for then plausibly and persistently. It will hire the best buyable minds to devote their whole time to presenting its case. And it will finally either convince the general public that its case is sound, or so befuddle it that clear thinking on the subject becomes next to impossible.

    The proposed funding for the arts commission is a clear illustration of the problem with many pleas for public funding. A small group of people will benefit powerfully from this spending. What about the rest of us? Government-funded arts supporters make the case that the cost of the funding is just 29 cents per person in Kansas. Who of us will get worked up over such a small cost?

    The Public Choice school of economics calls this the problem of concentrated benefits and dispersed costs. It’s a huge problem.

    Besides the financial aspects of government funding of arts, there’s the artistic issue itself. There are very important reasons to keep government away from art. Lawrence W. Reed wrote in What’s Wrong with Government Funding of the Arts? of the harm of turning over responsibility to the government for things we value and find worthwhile:

    I can think of an endless list of desirable, enriching things in life, of which very few carry an automatic tag that says, “Must be provided by taxes and politicians.” Such things include good books, nice lawns, nutritious food, and smiling faces. A rich culture consists, as you know, of so many good things that have nothing to do with government, and thank God they don’t. We should seek to nurture those things privately and voluntarily because “private” and “voluntary” are key indicators that people are awake to them and believe in them. The surest way I know to sap the vitality of almost any worthwhile endeavor is to send a message that says, “You can slack off of that; the government will now do it.” That sort of “flight from responsibility,” frankly, is at the source of many societal ills today: many people don’t take care of their parents in their old age because a federal program will do it; others have abandoned their children because until recent welfare reforms, they’d get a bigger check if they did.

    The boosters of government arts funding in Kansas make the case that arts are important. Therefore, they say, government must be involved.

    But actually, the opposite is true. The more important to our culture we believe the arts to be, the stronger the case for getting government out of its funding. Here’s why. In a statement opposing the elimination of the Kansas Arts Commission, former executive director Llewellyn Crain explained that “The Kansas Arts Commission provides valuable seed money that leverages private funds …”

    This “seed money” effect is precisely why government should not be funding arts. David Boaz explains:

    Defenders of arts funding seem blithely unaware of this danger when they praise the role of the national endowments as an imprimatur or seal of approval on artists and arts groups. Jane Alexander says, “The Federal role is small but very vital. We are a stimulus for leveraging state, local and private money. We are a linchpin for the puzzle of arts funding, a remarkably efficient way of stimulating private money.” Drama critic Robert Brustein asks, “How could the [National Endowment for the Arts] be ‘privatized’ and still retain its purpose as a funding agency functioning as a stamp of approval for deserving art?” … I suggest that that is just the kind of power no government in a free society should have.

    We give up a lot when we turn over this power to government bureaucrats and arts commission cronies. Again I turn to David Boaz, who in his book The Politics of Freedom: Taking on The Left, The Right and Threats to Our Liberties wrote this in a chapter titled “The Separation of Art and State”:

    It is precisely because art has power, because it deals with basic human truths, that it must be kept separate from government. Government, as I noted earlier, involves the organization of coercion. In a free society coercion should be reserved only for such essential functions of government as protecting rights and punishing criminals. People should not be forced to contribute money to artistic endeavors that they may not approve, nor should artists be forced to trim their sails to meet government standards.

    Government funding of anything involves government control. That insight, of course, is part of our folk wisdom: “He who pays the piper calls the tune.” “Who takes the king’s shilling sings the king’s song.”

    A few years ago when I read Rhonda Holman’s editorial City can be proud of its arts work in the July 15, 2008 Wichita Eagle — which starts with the stirring reminder that “The arts fire the mind and feed the heart” — I hoped that perhaps she was going to call for less government involvement in the arts. I thought she would argue that anything so important to man’s nature should not be placed in the hands of government.

    But my hopes were not realized, because soon she described the City of Wichita’s commitment to permanent spending on arts as “a bold and even brave investment in quality of life.” It appears that even the yearnings of our hearts and minds are subject to government management and investment — and, worst of all, control.

    “Government art.” Is this not a sterling example of an oxymoron? Must government weasel its way into every aspect of our lives? Governor Brownback can do the human spirit and all the people of Kansas a favor by vetoing government funding of the arts in Kansas.