Voice For Liberty

Tag: Politics

  • Kansas public employee unions overreact

    Kansas National Education Association (KNEA)

    Response to a bill being considered in the Kansas Legislature has triggered strong reaction from public employee unions. Kansas taxpayers should take notice of this extraordinary hyperbole, and hope legislators can enact this legislation for the good of Kansas.

    The legislation is HB 2023. The fiscal note for the bill summarizes it as follows: “HB 2023 relates to professional employees’ organizations (PEOs). The bill makes it unlawful for any PEO to use any dues, fees, assessments or any period payment deducted from a member’s paycheck for the purpose of engaging in political activities. If a member wishes to donate money for political activity by the PEO, a specific donation must be made to a separate fund so designated. The bill defines political activity for the purpose of enforcement of its provisions. The bill amends the Public Employer-Employee Relations Act (PEERA) to make it unlawful for a public employee organization to spend any of its income to engage in public activities.”

    The meaning is that if teachers unions want to fund political activity, their members must make contributions specifically for that purpose. Presently these contributions are automatically deducted from members’ paychecks. If these organizations want to engage in political activity, they may still do so, as is their right. They’ll simply have to raise the funds differently.

    Sounds simple, doesn’t it? Eminently reasonable, to most people.

    That is, unless you represent the unions this law would affect. In that case, you brand this as “paycheck deception,” as does the Kansas Democratic Party.

    Or, you might say this bill is an “attack on the free speech rights of working Kansans.”

    Or: “Republican legislators seek to limit fundamental constitutional rights.”

    The group Working Kansans Alliance makes these claims. Really.

    Kansas National Education Association (KNEA), our state’s teachers union weighed in on this issue, too. Its email to its members was headlined “Legislature seeks legislation to silence teachers.”

    The first paragraph ratchets up the rhetoric: “We’ve been expecting something and here it comes — the first official salvo in a possible war on teachers.”

    The next day KNEA reported on the testimony of David Schauner, the union’s general counsel:

    Schauner began his testimony by quoting Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., “Our lives begin to end the day we remain silent about the things that matter”.

    He went on to explain why this bill is such an onerous idea:

    “Participation in the political process is a thing that matters. The right to act collectively matters, the expression of dissenting political points of view matters. It matters that we as a democracy have decided that our political dissent is the bedrock of our continued success as a nation. When those in power decide to punish those who have publically [sic] disagreed then we are lost as a democracy. It matters that the right to act in concert with those who hold shared values. It matters that the nation’s founding fathers demanded the first and fifth amendments to the U.S. Constitution. It matters that those who teach our children participate in politics. It matters that all citizens be treated equally in the eyes of the law.”

    I wonder: If the existence of the unions is dependent upon automatic paycheck deductions, how valuable are they to members?

    How public employee unions are different

    Public employee unions contribute to political campaigns. They then sit across the bargaining table from those officeholders they elected (or their representatives). Is there a conflict of interest here? Absolutely there is.

    Who is going to prevail in these negotiations? Who represents the public?

    The big difference between public employee unions and other unions is the discipline that markets impose on private sector companies. Government doesn’t face this powerful force.

    If private business firm X is overly generous to its workers in terms of pay and benefits, it will probably suffer in performance compared to its stingy competitor firm Y. Firm X may go out of business.

    (If firm X is General Motors or Chrysler, however, the federal government will perform a bailout at the expense of everyone but unions. This is a good reason why government should not intervene in matters like this.)

    An alternative, of course, is that firm X — by being generous in pay — becomes more efficient and competitive in the market. Firm Y workers then benefit, by either going to work for X, or Y realizing that it needs to pay workers like X does.

    These scenarios require market competition to work. Without that, it’s a one-sided game, and the taxpaying public loses.

    Here’s some excerpts from today’s Joseph Ashby Show on this topic:

  • Economic development in Wichita, the next step

    Critics of the economic development policies in use by the City of Wichita are often portrayed as not being able to see and appreciate the good things these policies are producing, even though they are unfolding right before our very eyes. The difference is that some look beyond the immediate — what is seen — and ask “And then what will happen?” — looking for the unseen.

    Thomas Sowell explains the problem in a passage from the first chapter of Applied economics: thinking beyond stage one:

    When we are talking about applied economic policies, we are no longer talking about pure economic principles, but about the interactions of politics and economics. The principles of economics remain the same, but the likelihood of those principles being applied unchanged is considerably reduced, because politics has its own principles and imperatives. It is not just that politicians’ top priority is getting elected and re-elected, or that their time horizon seldom extends beyond the next election. The general public as well behaves differently when making political decisions rather than economic decisions. Virtually no one puts as much time and close attention into deciding whether to vote for one candidate rather than another as is usually put into deciding whether to buy one house rather than another — or perhaps even one car rather than another.

    The voter’s political decisions involve having a minute influence on policies which affect many other people, while economic decision-making is about having a major effect on one’s own personal well-being. It should not be surprising that the quantity and quality of thinking going into these very different kinds of decisions differ correspondingly. One of the ways in which these decisions differ is in not thinking through political decisions beyond the immediate consequences. When most voters do not think beyond stage one, many elected officials have no incentive to weigh what the consequences will be in later stages — and considerable incentives to avoid getting beyond what their constituents think and understand, for fear that rival politicians can drive a wedge between them and their constituents by catering to public misconceptions.

    The economic decisions made by governing bodies like the Wichita City Council have a large impact on the lives of Wichitans. But as Sowell explains, these decisions are made by politicians for political reasons.

    Sowell goes on to explain the danger of stopping the thinking process at stage one:

    When I was an undergraduate studying economics under Professor Arthur Smithies of Harvard, he asked me in class one day what policy I favored on a particular issue of the times. Since I had strong feelings on that issue, I proceeded to answer him with enthusiasm, explaining what beneficial consequences I expected from the policy I advocated.

    “And then what will happen?” he asked.

    The question caught me off guard. However, as I thought about it, it became clear that the situation I described would lead to other economic consequences, which I then began to consider and to spell out.

    “And what will happen after that?” Professor Smithies asked.

    As I analyzed how the further economic reactions to the policy would unfold, I began to realize that these reactions would lead to consequences much less desirable than those at the first stage, and I began to waver somewhat.

    “And then what will happen?” Smithies persisted.

    By now I was beginning to see that the economic reverberations of the policy I advocated were likely to be pretty disastrous — and, in fact, much worse than the initial situation that it was designed to improve.

    Simple as this little exercise may sound, it goes further than most economic discussions about policies on a wide range of issues. Most thinking stops at stage one.

    We see stage one thinking all the time when looking at government. In Wichita, for example, a favorite question of city council members seeking to justify their support for government intervention such as a tax increment financing (TIF) district or some other form of subsidy is “How much more tax does the building pay now?” Or perhaps “How many jobs will (or did) the project create?”

    These questions, and the answers to them, are examples of stage one thinking. The answers are easily obtained and cited as evidence of the success of the government program.

    But driving by a store or hotel in a TIF district and noticing a building or people working at jobs does not tell the entire story. Using the existence of a building, or the payment of taxes, or jobs created, is stage one thinking, and no more than that.

    Fortunately, there are people who have thought beyond stage one, and some concerning local economic development and TIF districts. And what they’ve found should spur politicians and bureaucrats to find ways to move beyond stage one in their thinking.

    An example are economists Richard F. Dye and David F. Merriman, who have studied tax increment financing extensively. Their article Tax Increment Financing: A Tool for Local Economic Development states in its conclusion:

    TIF districts grow much faster than other areas in their host municipalities. TIF boosters or naive analysts might point to this as evidence of the success of tax increment financing, but they would be wrong. Observing high growth in an area targeted for development is unremarkable.

    So TIFs are good for the favored development that receives the subsidy — not a surprising finding. What about the rest of the city? Continuing from the same study:

    If the use of tax increment financing stimulates economic development, there should be a positive relationship between TIF adoption and overall growth in municipalities. This did not occur. If, on the other hand, TIF merely moves capital around within a municipality, there should be no relationship between TIF adoption and growth. What we find, however, is a negative relationship. Municipalities that use TIF do worse.

    We find evidence that the non-TIF areas of municipalities that use TIF grow no more rapidly, and perhaps more slowly, than similar municipalities that do not use TIF.

    In a different paper (The Effects of Tax Increment Financing on Economic Development), the same economists wrote “We find clear and consistent evidence that municipalities that adopt TIF grow more slowly after adoption than those that do not. … These findings suggest that TIF trades off higher growth in the TIF district for lower growth elsewhere. This hypothesis is bolstered by other empirical findings.”

    Here we have an example of thinking beyond stage one. The results are opposite of what one-stage thinking produces.

    Some city council members are concerned about creating jobs, and are swayed by the promises of developers that their establishments will employ a certain number of workers. Again, this thinking stops at stage one. But others have looked farther, as has Paul F. Byrne of Washburn University. The title of his recent report is Does Tax Increment Financing Deliver on Its Promise of Jobs? The Impact of Tax Increment Financing on Municipal Employment Growth, and in its abstract we find this conclusion regarding the impact of TIF on jobs:

    Increasingly, municipal leaders justify their use of tax increment financing (TIF) by touting its role in improving municipal employment. However, empirical studies on TIF have primarily examined TIF’s impact on property values, ignoring the claim that serves as the primary justification for its use. This article addresses the claim by examining the impact of TIF adoption on municipal employment growth in Illinois, looking for both general impact and impact specific to the type of development supported. Results find no general impact of TIF use on employment. However, findings suggest that TIF districts supporting industrial development may have a positive effect on municipal employment, whereas TIF districts supporting retail development have a negative effect on municipal employment. These results are consistent with industrial TIF districts capturing employment that would have otherwise occurred outside of the adopting municipality and retail TIF districts shifting employment within the municipality to more labor-efficient retailers within the TIF district.

    While this research might be used to support a TIF district for industrial development, TIF in Wichita is primarily used for retail development. And, when thinking beyond stage one, the effect on employment — considering the entire city — is negative.

    It’s hard to think beyond stage one. It requires considering not only the seen, but also the unseen, as Frederic Bastiat taught us in his famous parable of the broken window. But over and over we see how politicians at all levels of government stop thinking at stage one. This is one of the many reasons why we need to return as much decision-making as possible to the private sector, and drastically limit the powers of politicians and governments.

  • Kansas judicial selection: The need for reform

    Kansas University School of Law Professor Stephen J. Ware appeared on the KAKE Television public affairs program This Week in Kansas to discuss the method of judicial selection in Kansas. Phil Journey and Chapman Rackaway appear as panelists. Tim Brown is the host.

    In today’s debate the issue of judicial selection reform is usually characterized as strictly political. Now that Kansas has a conservative governor and a conservative legislature, it is said that conservatives want to remake the courts to suit their ideology.

    That may be the motivation for many. But Professor Ware has advocated for reform for a long time, favoring a system of appointment by the governor with confirmation by the senate. Ware’s 2007 research paper on this matter, published by the Federalist Society, may be read at Selection to the Kansas Supreme Court. The opening sentence of this report starkly states the singular character of the process in Kansas: “Kansas is the only state in the union that gives the members of its bar majority control over the selection of state supreme court justices.”

    At the time Ware wrote this paper and convinced me of the need for reform, Democrat Kathleen Sebelius had just been re-elected Kansas Governor. The senate — which would confirm the governor’s appointments — was firmly in the control of political liberals and moderates who would be sure to rubberstamp her pick. Rubberstamp — that’s a word we see used today by progressives to describe the machinery of Kansas politics at the state level.

    Another paper by Ware explains the problem with the process used in Kansas. The paper is titled Originalism, Balanced Legal Realism and Judicial Selection: A Case Study and may be downloaded at no charge.

  • Progressives shaping the future of America. It’s a good thing.

    Mother Jones approvingly reports on a secretive meeting of progressive activists.

    When conservatives do this, it’s branded as evil. Mother Jones told us so. But it’s a good thing for liberals and progressives to meet, raise funds, and conspire, according to the magazine.

    The progressive groups that attended the meeting (mentioned below) support policies (with a few exceptions) that reduce economic freedom and liberty. They’re obviously emboldened by a second Obama term. We’ll have to watch closely to protect ourselves.

    A month after President Barack Obama won reelection, top brass from three dozen of the most powerful groups in liberal politics met at the headquarters of the National Education Association (NEA), a few blocks north of the White House. Brought together by the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, Communication Workers of America (CWA), and the NAACP, the meeting was invite-only and off-the-record. Despite all the Democratic wins in November, a sense of outrage filled the room as labor officials, environmentalists, civil rights activists, immigration reformers, and a panoply of other progressive leaders discussed the challenges facing the left and what to do to beat back the deep-pocketed conservative movement.

    At the end of the day, many of the attendees closed with a pledge of money and staff resources to build a national, coordinated campaign around three goals: getting big money out of politics, expanding the voting rolls while fighting voter ID laws, and rewriting Senate rules to curb the use of the filibuster to block legislation. The groups in attendance pledged a total of millions of dollars and dozens of organizers to form a united front on these issues — potentially, a coalition of a kind rarely seen in liberal politics, where squabbling is common and a stay-in-your-lane attitude often prevails. “It was so exciting,” says Michael Brune, the Sierra Club’s executive director. “We weren’t just wringing our hands about the Koch brothers. We were saying, ‘I’ll put in this amount of dollars and this many organizers.’”

  • Wichita economic development solution, postponed

    Recent reporting in the Wichita Business Journal on Wichita’s economic development efforts has many officials saying Wichita doesn’t have enough incentives to compete with other cities. That is, we are not spending enough on incentives.

    Whether these incentives are good economic development policy is open for debate. I don’t believe we need them, and that we in Kansas and Wichita can chart another course to increase economic freedom in Kansas. That will make our area appealing to companies. But our local bureaucrats, most business leaders, and nearly all elected officials believe that targeted incentives are the way to attract and retain business.

    (Charts at the end of this article illustrate the record in Wichita on jobs.)

    Our leaders have identified what they believe is a solution to a problem, but have not implemented that solution effectively, in their own words.

    I should say have not implemented the solution on a widespread basis, because Wichita has devoted more tax money to economic development. According to the 2010 City Manager’s Policy Message, page CM-2, “One mill of property tax revenue will be shifted from the Debt Service Fund to the General Fund. In 2011 and 2012, one mill of property tax will be shifted to the General Fund to provide supplemental financing. The shift will last two years, and in 2013, one mill will be shifted back to the Debt Service Fund. The additional millage will provide a combined $5 million for economic development opportunities.”

    So the city has decided to spend more tax dollars on economic development, but this allocation is being phased out — at the same time nearly everyone is calling for more to be spent in this area.

    Isn’t this a failure of political and bureaucratic leadership? We have a long-standing problem, officials have identified what they believe is a solution, but it is not being implemented. These leaders have the ability to spend more on economic development, as illustrated by Wichita’s shifting of tax revenue.

    Even if we believe that an active role for government in economic development is best (and I don’t believe that), we have to conclude that our efforts aren’t working. Several long-serving politicians and bureaucrats that have presided over this failure: Mayor Carl Brewer has been on the city council or served as mayor since 2001. Economic development director Allen Bell has been working for the city since 1992. City Attorney Gary Rebenstorf has served for many years. At Sedgwick County, manager William Buchanan has held that position for 21 years. On the Sedgwick County Commission, Dave Unruh has been in office since 2003, and Tim Norton since 2001. Unruh has said he wants to be Wichita’s next mayor.

    Wichita City Manager Robert Layton has had less time to influence the course of economic development in Wichita. But as he approaches his fourth anniversary in Wichita, he starts to become part of the legacy of Wichita’s efforts in economic development.

    Wichita’s job creation record

    Two charts illustrate the record of job growth in Wichita. The first shows Wichita job growth compared to Kansas and the nation. Data is from U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, and indexed with values for 2001 set to 1.00.

    As you can see, job growth in Wichita trails both Kansas and the nation.

    The next chart shows Wichita job growth by sector.

    Private sector job growth is prominently lower than government. This is a problem, because more economic activity is directed away from the productive private sector to inefficient government.

  • Year in review: 2012

    Following is a selection of stories that appeared on Voice for Liberty in 2012. Was it a good or bad year for the causes of economic freedom, individual liberty, limited government, free markets, and civil society?

    January

    Boeing departure presents challenge for Wichita and Kansas. The announcement of the departure from Wichita of Boeing presents challenges for the Wichita area and the state of Kansas. The response of government officials over the next few years will need to depart from past and present practice if Wichita wants to build a dynamic and sustainable economy. With a few exceptions, our current elected officials will likely proceed with targeted economic development, and Wichita and Kansas will miss an opportunity to implement meaningful and lasting change.

    Wichita TIF: Taxpayer-funded benefits to political players. It is now confirmed: In Wichita, tax increment financing (TIF) leads to taxpayer-funded waste that benefits those with political connections at city hall. … The flow of tax dollars Wichita city leaders had planned for Douglas Place called for taxpayer funds to be routed to a politically-connected construction firm. And unlike the real world, where developers have an incentive to build economically, the city created incentives for Douglas Place developers to spend lavishly in a parking garage, at no cost to themselves. In fact, the wasteful spending would result in profit for them.

    Kansas senators seen as unfriendly to business. This was the start of the effort that resulted in a switch in control of the Kansas Senate.

    Kansas Speaker: Schools don’t spend all they have. Based on choices that many school districts have made in response to legislation giving them flexibility to spend fund balances, Speaker of the Kansas House of Representatives Mike O’Neal questions whether a school funding crisis actually exists.

    Kansas Bioscience Authority. The release of a forensics audit of the Kansas Bioscience Authority coupled with two days of joint committee hearings revealed an independent government agency out of control, an audit that draws conclusions described as sanitized of important details, and an agency and legislative supporters who believe that now, all is well at the KBA.

    February

    Fact checking the Wichita Ambassador Hotel campaign. Claims made by a group supporting taxpayer subsidy for the Ambassador Hotel in Wichita are put to the test.

    Carl Brewer: State of the City for Wichita, 2012. Last night Wichita Mayor Carl Brewer delivered his annual State of the City Address. We learned, again, that Wichita’s mayor is openly dismissive of economic freedom, free markets, and limited government, calling these principles of freedom and liberty “simplistic.” Instead, his government prefers crony capitalism and corporate welfare. This is the troubling message that emerges from Brewer’s State of the City address.

    Market solutions best for Wichita. Wichita Mayor Carl Brewer wants to double down on economic development strategies that have produced very little good.

    Kansas needs pay-to-play laws. In Wichita, campaign contributions made to city council candidates often are not about supporting political ideologies — liberal, moderate, or conservative. It’s about opportunists seeking money from government. Pay-to-play laws can help control this harmful practice.

    No-bid contracts a problem in Wichita. Wichita Eagle reporting uncovers a problem with no-bid contracts for construction projects in Wichita. This revelation illustrates these things: a Wichita City Council almost totally captured by special interests, crony capitalism on steroids, and another example of why Wichita and Kansas need pay-to-play laws.

    Why vote no in the Wichita Ambassador Hotel election. In the Wichita Ambassador Hotel special election, there are many reasons to vote no for the good of Wichita.

    Wichita economic development isn’t working. Economic development in Wichita isn’t working very well. The Greater Wichita Economic Development Coalition along with long-serving politicians and bureaucrats need to be held accountable, and our strategy must change.

    In Wichita, pushing back against political cronyism. Tonight the people of Wichita witnessed a victory for common sense over political cronyism.

    Wichita school board meeting: Not for the public. Wichita school board president Betty Arnold admonished the audience: “This board meeting is held in public, but it is not for the public, or of the public.” Video here.

    March

    Wichita, Kansas voters reject corporate welfare and cronyism. Tuesday, Kansas voters made a bold statement, rejecting a plan favoring cronyism and big government, instead choosing to take a stand for fiscal responsibility.

    Kansas and Wichita lag the nation in tax costs. If we in Kansas and Wichita wonder why our economic growth is slow and our economic development programs don’t seem to be producing results, there is now data to answer the question why: Our tax rates are high — way too high.

    A Wichita shocker. The Wall Street Journal comments on last week’s election in Wichita, noting “Local politicians like to get in bed with local business, and taxpayers are usually the losers.”

    Wind energy split in Kansas. Kansas politicians are split over the the government’s subsidy programs for wind energy.

    Brownback, Moran wrong on wind tax credits. Kansas Governor Sam Brownback and U.S. Senator Jerry Moran of Kansas are mistaken regarding the economic effect of tax credits that benefit the wind power industry.

    In Kansas, public school establishment attacks high standards. When a Kansas public policy think tank placed ads in Kansas newspapers calling attention to the performance of Kansas schools, the public school establishment didn’t like it. The defense of the Kansas school status quo, especially that coming from Kansas Commissioner of Education Diane DeBacker, ought to cause Kansans to examine the motives of the school spending establishment and their ability to be truthful about Kansas schools.

    Wichita new home tax rebate program: The analysis. A document released by the City of Wichita casts strong doubt on the wisdom of a new home property tax rebate program. The document also lets us know that city staff are not being entirely honest with the citizens of Wichita.

    In Kansas, no E-verify, please. The hope that if we can somehow stop illegal immigrants from obtaining jobs, then unemployed Americans can go back to work, is a false hope. For that and other reasons, I can’t join with Kansas conservatives who support E-verify and other harsh anti-immigrant measures.

    April

    Kansas may again resort to government art. Kansas may be ready to restore some state funding for the arts. But for reasons economic, human, and artistic, we ought to keep Kansas government out of art. Kansas should allow people themselves to decide how to spend their own money on what they think is important to them. To implement government funding of art is to override the freedom of individual choice with political and bureaucratic decisions.

    For Koch critics, facts aren’t part of the equation. A newspaper editorial begins with “What is it, or why is it, that the name Koch, particularly here in Lawrence and Kansas, seems to trigger such angry, passionate and negative responses from a certain segment of the community, particularly among some at Kansas University?” It’s a good question.

    In Kansas, planning will be captured by special interests. The government planning process started in south-central Kansas will likely be captured by special interest groups that see ways to benefit from the plan. The public choice school of economics and political science has taught us how special interest groups seek favors from government at enormous costs to society, and we will see this at play again over the next few years.

    Federal grants increase future local spending. Not only are we taxed to pay for the cost of funding federal and state grants, the units of government that receive grants are very likely to raise their own levels of taxation in response to the receipt of the grants. This creates a cycle of ever-expanding government.

    Thinking beyond stage one in economic development for Wichita. It’s hard to think beyond stage one. It requires considering not only the seen, but also the unseen, as Frederic Bastiat taught us in his famous parable of the broken window. But over and over we see how politicians at all levels of government stop thinking at stage one. This is one of the many reasons why we need to return as much decision-making as possible to the private sector, and drastically limit the powers of politicians and governments.

    Wichita pension plan report. First, the good news: The condition of Wichita Employees’ Retirement System is nowhere near as dire as Kansas Public Employee Retirement System, or KPERS.. But the city is having to make much higher contributions to keep the plan funded. These contribution rates are likely to increase, as the plan relies on unrealistic assumptions.

    Wichita decides to join sustainable communities planning. The City of Wichita has decided to embrace centralized government planning.

    In Kansas, STAR bonds vote uplifted cronyism over capitalism. In Kansas, many purportedly fiscally conservative members of the House and Senate voted to uplift cronyism over capitalism by extending the STAR bonds program.

    Intrust Bank Arena finances: The worst news is hidden. The true state of the finances of the Intrust Bank Arena in downtown Wichita are not often a subject of public discussion. Arena boosters promote a revenue-sharing arrangement between the county and the arena operator, referring to this as profit or loss. But this arrangement is not an accurate and complete accounting, and hides the true economics of the arena.

    Kansas state spending is not, itself, a good. In the debate over reducing and eventually eliminating the income tax in Kansas, those who oppose income tax reduction say it will simply shift the burden of taxation to others, in the form of sales and property taxes. This is true only if we decide to keep spending at the same rate. We could cut spending in response to reduced revenue, but it is argued that state spending is a good thing, a source of wealth that Kansas should continue to rely on.

    May

    Kansas school test scores. Kansas scores on the nationwide NAEP tests are unchanged or falling at the same time scores on Kansas tests are rising — “jumping,” in the recent words of Kansas Education Commissioner Diane DeBacker.

    Kansans uninformed on school spending. As the Kansas Legislature debates spending on schools, we have to hope that legislators are more knowledgeable about school spending than the average Kansan. Surveys have found that few Kansans have accurate information regarding school spending. Surprisingly, those with children in the public school system are even more likely to be uninformed regarding accurate figures. But when presented with accurate information about changes in school spending, few Kansans are willing to pay increased taxes to support more school spending.

    Despite superintendents’ claim, Kansas schools have low standards. Kansas school district superintendents write “Historically, our state has had high-performing schools, which make Kansas a great place to live, raise a family and run a business.” The truth is that when compared to other states, Kansas has low standards.

    Kansas could grow with lower taxes. Two research papers illustrate the need to reduce taxes in Kansas, finding that high taxes are associated with reduced income and low economic growth. Research such as this rebuts the presumption of government spending advocates that reducing taxes will kill jobs in Kansas.

    Wichita school spending: The grain of truth. The Wichita school district, like most of the Kansas school spending establishment, uses spending figures containing a grain of truth to make a larger and misleading argument about school spending.

    June

    School funding suitability in Kansas. As a Kansas court considers intervening in Kansas school finance, the importance of accurate and meaningful evidence on school funding should be the court’s top priority. Supporters of increased school funding rely on two studies that they claim supports more funding for schools. An analysis by Kansas Policy Institute is helpful in understanding why the studies relied on in the past should be discarded.

    In Kansas, redistricting went well, after all. The Kansas political class is upset because a federal court drew new districts they way they should be drawn.

    Kansas legislative summary documents available. Kansas Legislative Research Department has completed its summaries of the 2012 session of the Kansas Legislature.

    July

    Kansas Economic Freedom Index, 2012 Edition. The Kansas Economic Freedom Index identifies Kansas legislators who vote in favor of economic freedom — and those who don’t.

    Coalition Grades Kansas Legislators’ Support of Economic Freedom. A new scorecard released today takes a broad look at voting records and establishes how supportive Kansas state legislators were of economic freedom, limited government and individual liberty in the 2012 legislative session.

    Wichita increases its debt. Wichita has increased its long-term debt load and shifted tax money from debt repayment to current consumption.

    Wichita fails ethics test. Wichita Mayor Carl Brewer and most members of the city council failed a test concerning government ethics.

    Kansas auto dealers benefit from anti-competitive law. Kansas automobile dealers benefit from a law that limits the ability of competitors to form new dealerships. Consumers are harmed.

    Kansas schools receive NCLB waiver. Kansas schools have received a waiver from the federal No Child Left Behind Act.

    Wichita school spending. A statement by Wichita school superintendent John Allison is part of an ongoing campaign of misinformation spread by school spending advocates in Wichita and across Kansas.

    Wichita-area economic development policy changes proposed. Wichita and Sedgwick County are considering revising the economic development policies.

    Michigan company involved in disputed Wichita airport contract contributes to Jeff Longwell. A campaign finance report filed by Wichita City Council Member Jeff Longwell contains contributions from executives associated with Walbridge, a Michigan construction company partnering with Key Construction to build the new Wichita airport terminal.

    August

    Kansas traditional Republicans: The record. As Kansas Republicans decide who to vote for in next week’s primary election, moderate senate incumbents and many newspapers urge voting for those Republicans who promote a “reasonable,” “balanced,” and “responsible” approach to Kansas government. When we examine the record of the coalition of moderate Republicans and Democrats that governed Kansas for the first decade of this century, we see legislative accomplishment that not many Kansans may be aware of.

    Wichita property tax mill levy has increased and shifted in use. The City of Wichita says that the property tax mill levy has not increased in many years. But it has. In addition, property tax revenue has been shifted from debt repayment to current consumption.

    In Kansas, rejecting left-wing Republicans. Kansas voters have realized that the governance of Kansas by a coalition of Democrats and left-wing Republicans has not been in the state’s best interest.

    Wichita voters reject cronyism — again. Voters in Wichita and the surrounding area have rejected, for the second time this year, the culture of political cronyism that passes for economic development in Wichita.

    Wichita revises economic development policy. The City of Wichita has passed a revision to its economic development policies. Instead of promoting economic freedom and a free-market approach, the new policy gives greater power to city bureaucrats and politicians, and is unlikely to produce the economic development that Wichita needs.

    Charles Koch: The importance of economic freedom. Charles Koch explains the importance of economic freedom for everyone.

    Andover, a Kansas city overtaken by blight. In order to implement a tax giveaway to buyers of new homes, a city essentially declares total blight infestation.

    Proposed Wichita sign ordinance problematic. The Wichita City Council will consider implementing a sign ordinance that has a major problem.

    Wichita fluoridation debate reveals attitudes of government. Is community water fluoridation like iodized salt? According to Wichita City Council Member and Vice Mayor Janet Miller, we didn’t vote on whether to put iodine in table salt, so Wichitans don’t need to vote on whether to add fluoride to drinking water.

    Wichita speculative industrial buildings. A tax forgiveness policy for speculative industrial buildings in Wichita may not produce the intended results.

    Renewable Portfolio Standard costly for Kansas. A policy promoted by Kansas Governor Sam Brownback will result in higher electricity costs, fewer jobs, and less investment in Kansas.

    September

    Wichita Mayor Carl Brewer on role of government. It’s worse than “You didn’t build that.” Wichita Mayor Carl Brewer tells us you can’t build that — not without government guidance and intervention, anyway.

    Charles G. Koch: Corporate cronyism harms America. When businesses feed at the federal trough, they threaten public support for business and free markets, explains Charles G. Koch.

    NetApp economic development incentives: all of them. The Wichita City Council will consider economic development incentives designed to secure new jobs in Wichita at NetApp. Few Kansans, however, are probably aware of the entire scope of the incentive package and the harm it causes.

    Open records again an issue in Kansas. Responses to records requests made by Kansas Policy Institute are bringing attention to shortcomings in the Kansas Open Records Act.

    Kansas lawmakers, including judges, should be selected democratically. While many believe that judges should not “legislate from the bench,” the reality is that lawmaking is a judicial function. In a democracy, lawmakers should be elected under the principle of “one person, one vote.” But Kansas, which uses the Missouri Plan for judicial selection to its two highest courts, violates this principle.

    Surveillance state arrives in Wichita. In an effort to control crime in Old Town, Wichita is importing the police surveillance state. Once camera use has started, it is likely to spread.

    Wichita economic development, two stories. Two items on the agenda for the Wichita City Council give an insight into the nature and efficacy of economic development efforts in Wichita.

    October

    Wichita government’s attitude towards citizens’ right to know is an issue. The City of Wichita relies on a narrow and unreasonable interpretation of the Kansas Open Records Act to avoid letting citizens know how taxpayer money is spent.

    Regarding Kansas schools, power is not with parents. Information and options allow parents to make the best decisions for their children regarding schools. But in Kansas, parents have little power to make good decisions for their children, relative to the other states.

    Wichita/Sedgwick County Community Investment Plan survey. A survey created for the Wichita/Sedgwick County Community Investment Plan has numerous problems and seems designed to satisfy the goals of government officials and planners instead of citizens.

    Wichita waltzing waters dedication a chance to reflect. While the dedication ceremonies for Wichita’s Waltzing Waters fountain are promoted as celebrations, we might use this opportunity to review the history and impact of WaterWalk, which has absorbed many millions of taxpayer subsidy with few results.

    Charges of slashing Kansas school spending. In their campaigns, Kansas Democrats are charging that school spending has been slashed.

    Introducing Quick Takes. Quick Takes is a new feature of Voice for Liberty in Wichita.

    Citizens generally misinformed on Kansas school spending. When asked about the level of spending on public schools in Kansas, citizens are generally uninformed or misinformed. They also incorrectly thought that spending has declined in recent years.

    November

    In Sedgwick County, a judicial candidate takes the low road. Voters are accustomed to political campaigns that sink low with distorted facts, missing facts, innuendo, and outright lies. Judges, however, ought to be held to a higher standard, and in Kansas, the Supreme Court has rules for judges to follow in their campaigns. But the campaign for incumbent Richard T. Ballinger in Sedgwick County, Kansas, doesn’t seem to be interested in following these rules.

    From the United Nations to Sedgwick County. It took from 1987 to 2012, but Sedgwick County has adopted the language of the United Nations regarding sustainability.

    You should be able to photograph your ballot. “Every election is a sort of advance auction of stolen goods.” Whether the sale is implicit or explicit, it doesn’t change what’s happening. There’s no need to create new laws or enforcement powers.

    In Wichita, creating more willing taxpayers. Is the goal of Wichita/Sedgwick County Community Investments Plan to create more willing taxpayers? A paper from the Hugo Wall School of Urban and Public affairs gives us a clue — and a warning.

    I, Pencil: The Movie. Now in movie form, the story of the humble pencil illustrates the wonder and power of “the spontaneous configuration of creative human energies.”

    Wichita licenses the striping of parking lots. Next week the Wichita City Council will consider licensing and regulating the painting of stripes in parking lots. How, may I ask, has civilization advanced without the benefit of such regulation?

    In Wichita, confusion over air traffic statistics. The Kansas Affordable Airfares program is promoted by Wichita and Sedgwick County government despite problems with the data and statistics used to evaluate the program.

    Flight options from Wichita decline, compared to nation. A program designed to bring low air fares to Wichita appears to meet that goal, but the unintended and inevitable consequences of the program are not being recognized.

    December

    In Wichita, a quest for campaign finance reform. Actions of the Wichita City Council have shown that campaign finance reform is needed. Citizen groups are investigating how to accomplish this needed reform, since the council has not shown interest in reforming itself.

    Economic development incentives questioned. When the New York Times is concerned about the cost of government spending programs, it’s a safe bet that things are really out of control. Its recent feature reports on economic development incentive programs that are costly and produce questionable benefits.

    Wichita economic growth, in comparison. How does economic growth in Wichita compare to the state and nation?

    Bowllagio property purchases seem overpriced. As part of a planned real estate development, taxpayers may be asked to pay property owners much more than the appraised values for the parcels.

    O’Donnell critics should look inward first. Wichita’s mayor and city council need to examine their own errors of cronyism before lashing out at a member who made an inconsequential mistake.

    Wichita could do better regarding open government, if it wants. Wichita, if it wanted to, could provide greater transparency and access to open government.

    Wichita, again, fails at open government. The Wichita City Council, when presented with an opportunity to increase the ability of citizens to observe the workings of the government they pay for, decided against the cause of open government, preferring to keep the spending of taxpayer money a secret.

    Kansas budget solution overlooked. As Kansas prepares for a legislative session that must find ways to balance a budget in the face of declining revenues, not all solutions are being considered.

    In Wichita, failure to value open records and open government. On the KAKE Television public affairs program “This Week in Kansas” the failure of the Wichita City Council, especially council member Pete Meitzner, to recognize the value of open records and open government is discussed.

  • GDP growth by state and region

    Here is a visualization that shows the rate of growth of gross domestic product by state, regions, and the entire country. You may select one or more areas from the list by using Ctrl while clicking. The data is indexed, so that each area starts with a value of 100 in 1997.

    Data is from U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). Visualization created by myself using Tableau Public.

    Use the visualization below or click here to open in a new window.

  • Charles Koch profiled in Forbes

    The new issue of Forbes features a cover story on Charles and David Koch. It is very interesting and seems a balanced and fair article, but there are a few things that stand out. (Inside The Koch Empire: How The Brothers Plan To Reshape America.)

    An example: “Both Kochs innately understand that — unlike the populist appeal of their fellow midwestern billionaire Warren Buffett and his tax-the-rich advocacy — their message of pure, raw capitalism is a much tougher sell, even among capitalists.”

    I think the author should have written “even among business executives” rather than capitalists. That’s because Charles Koch has been outspoken about business cronyism, in September writing in The Wall Street Journal: “Far too many businesses have been all too eager to lobby for maintaining and increasing subsidies and mandates paid by taxpayers and consumers. This growing partnership between business and government is a destructive force, undermining not just our economy and our political system, but the very foundations of our culture.”

    I would imagine that most of the business leaders seeking government subsidies and mandates consider themselves capitalists. That’s a problem.

    Then: the description of “pure” capitalism as raw. I think we’re starting to realize just how raw politics and government have become. Capitalism, however, is a system based on respect for property and peaceful, beneficial exchange. Tom G. Palmer in the introduction to The Morality of Capitalism explains: “Far from being an amoral arena for the clash of interests, as capitalism is often portrayed by those who seek to undermine or destroy it, capitalist interaction is highly structured by ethical norms and rules. Indeed, capitalism rests on a rejection of the ethics of loot and grab, the means by which most wealth enjoyed by the wealthy has been acquired in other economic and political systems. … It’s only under conditions of capitalism that people commonly become wealthy without being criminals.”

    Often corporations are criticized by liberals as being too focused on short-term gains, that corporate raiders buy firms, gut them, chop them up, sell off assets, lay off employees, pile on debt — you know the story as used against Mitt Romney. But look at how Koch Industries operates:

    Charles spent $6 billion upfront to buy Georgia-Pacific, and rather than satisfy quarterly earnings estimates or dividend-hungry investors, he immediately directed the new division’s cash flow toward paying down the $15 billion in liabilities that it inherited. …

    The Koch long-game strategy is absolute: If it makes sense to them, the Kochs stay with the plan, no matter how burdensome or how long it takes. “We buy something not to milk it but to build it, to take its capabilities and add to them, and build new businesses,” [Charles] Koch says.

    That sounds like a business strategy the left should embrace, not vilify.

    Another curious statement by the author: “Given their strict adherence to the principals of transparent free markets, the Kochs’ secrecy seems hypocritical.” This is curious because transparency is an attribute not often associated with advocacy for free markets. Transparency is more associated with government as a desirable goal. Charles and David Koch are private citizens, not agents of government.

    There’s good news near the end of the article:

    The brothers’ new political emphasis in the coming year? Fighting corporate welfare.

    While Obama talks about getting rid of lobbyists, Charles says, the “only way he can achieve that stated objective is to get government out of the business of giving goodies. That’s like flies to honey,” he adds. “The first thing we’ve got to get rid of is business welfare and entitlements.”

    There’s much more in the article, available at Inside The Koch Empire: How The Brothers Plan To Reshape America.

  • You should be able to photograph your ballot

    Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach wants to make it illegal to photograph your completed ballot, and he wants the power to enforce this law.

    There’s a thorny question here: Who owns your ballot? You, or the state? If you, then can you be prohibited from photographing something that you own?

    The usual argument for such a law is that it constrains the buying and selling of votes. A photo of your ballot, it is said, would be proof to a vote-buyer that you delivered the service you promised, if you were to sell your vote. With no ability to prove your vote, it’s thought that there would be fewer buyers.

    I don’t think, however, that the state should start judging why people voted as they did. Those who voted for Democrats in Kansas: Did they do so because these candidates promised to take more money from others in order to spend more on schools for their children?

    Those who voted for Barack Obama: Did they do so because he promised to take more taxes from high income earners to give everyone else more “stuff?”

    When a political party transports someone to the polling place because they believe the voter will vote in their favor: Is that buying a vote? Or only providing free shipping and handling?

    As H.L. Mencken wrote some years ago — before government got really big — “Every election is a sort of advance auction of stolen goods.” Whether the sale is implicit or explicit, it doesn’t change what’s happening. There’s no need to create new laws or enforcement powers.

    If we’re really interested in reducing the market to buy and sell votes, let’s reduce the power of government to give away stuff that someone else has paid for.