Voice For Liberty

Tag: United States Congress

  • Paygo rule meaningless, harmful

    In a letter printed in yesterday’s Wichita Eagle, Doug Ittner of Wichita promotes the benefit of a rule known as “paygo.” The purpose of this rule is to force budget discipline on Congress. As the Washington Post’s David Broder wrote in that newspaper in June: “[Paygo’s] key provision requires that any new tax cut or entitlement increase be paid for by an offsetting reduction in other programs or a tax increase. If, for example, you want to guarantee child care for every working mother or provide her with a payroll tax cut, you would have to find savings or revenue elsewhere of equal size.”

    It sounds like Congress has suddenly been overtaken by reason, doesn’t it?

    If only it were so.

    The reality is that the paygo rule is so feckless as to be meaningless. In fact, the rule causes great harm. By sounding tough, the existence of the rule leaves apparently naive citizens like Mr. Ittner to conclude that things are under control in Washington. But things are far from under control, and this illusion of control is quite harmful.

    A good article to read to understand how paygo works is the Wall Street Journal article The ‘Paygo’ Coverup from June. Here are some of the points it makes.

    • When Democrats took over Congress in 2006, Speaker Nancy Pelosi imposed paygo rules. What happened? “By 2008, Speaker Pelosi had let those rules lapse no fewer than 12 times, to make way for $400 billion in deficit spending.”
    • President Obama campaigned on paygo, and the deficit has exploded by an unprecedented amount since he took office.
    • “Paygo only applies to new or expanded entitlement programs, not to existing programs such as Medicare.” Existing entitlements consume the lion’s share of federal spending, so paygo doesn’t apply to much of the problem.
    • Paygo doesn’t apply to discretionary spending.
    • Congress classifies spending to circumvent paygo. “… the 2010 budget resolution included a $2 billion increase for low-income heating assistance as an entitlement change that should be subject to paygo. But Congressional Democrats simply classified it as discretionary spending, thereby avoiding the need for $2 billion in cuts elsewhere.
    • “The other goal of this new paygo campaign is to make it easier to raise taxes in 2011, and impossible to cut taxes for years after that.”

    Even the liberal David Broder, in his Washington Post piece, recognizes that the current law is “full of loopholes,” as the title of his article indicates.

    We’d be better off without this meaningless rule, so full of loopholes, that lets politicians promote the illusion of controlling the federal budget.

  • Jean Schodorf’s education credentials

    Kansas state senator Jean Schodorf, a Republican from northwest Wichita, is testing the waters in the race for the Republican nomination for Kansas’ fourth congressional district.

    It appears that she’ll use her public education experience and advocacy as a selling point. As reported in today’s Wichita Eagle:

    She has served in the Senate since 2001 and is chairwoman of the Education Committee, where she has developed a reputation for fighting in favor of schools and school funding.

    At her Monday news conference, Schodorf was introduced by former state Board of Education member Carol Rupe, who served with her on the Wichita school board and was one of several current and former USD 259 officials in attendance.

    When judging Schodorf’s record on education, we should keep in mind that when considering educational freedom, Kansas is one of the very worst states in the nation. Kansas has no charter schools to speak of. Any hope of a voucher or tax credit program is a faint and distant goal. This is all well and good, according to Schodorf, and she has a fair degree of influence over education in Kansas stemming from her role as the chair of the senate education committee.

    Instead, the Kansas public school spending lobby seems to pretty much control the legislature and the governor’s chair. Yes, Kansas had to scale back on school spending this year. But schools fared much better than did other state agencies and spending lobbies. It’s a coalition of Democrats and moderate Republicans that allow this to happen. Schodof is one of these moderate Republicans, with several Democrats in the Senate possessing a more taxpayer-friendly voting record.

    If Schodorf starts to talk about the many years of rising Kansas test scores, I hope she calls for an independent audit of those scores. This is needed so that Kansans can see for themselves whether these scores are a valid and reliable measure of student achievement. This is important because the results on the federal NAEP scores don’t support the rapid rise shown on the Kansas tests. See Are Kansas school test scores believable? for background.

    Also, the public school monopoly and its supporters in Kansas — Schodorf being in this group — continue to dismiss a way to save Kansas a lot of money and improve educational freedom and results at the same time. As shown in my post School choice would save, not cost, Kansas, we can save money by implementing school choice programs.

    Let’s ask presumptive candidate Schodorf some of these questions, and then judge the validity of her purported care and concern for the education of Kansas schoolchildren.

  • Jean Schodorf a candidate for Congress?

    I just received a tweet from Jean Schodorf, a Republican member of the Kansas Senate from northwest Wichita:

    “JeanSchodorf Special announcement regarding 4th Congressional District, 2day from 12-1 @ the Midtown Resource Center. 1150 N. Broadway. Lunch Provided”

    Schodorf’s record in the senate is one of taxing and spending. In 2008, her rating by the Kansas Taxpayers Network was 29%. Several senate Democrats did better.

    She’s also voted against legislation allowing the coal plant, although she did vote for the compromise bill.

    So a question I have — seriously, sort of — is in which party she’ll choose to run.

    What’s interesting to me is this question: Does this foreshadow an entrance by television newsman and producer Bill Kurtis (her brother) into the race for Kansas governor? He’s said no, he’s not interested.

    Update: Wichita Eagle coverage is at Schodorf explores Congress run.

  • Good news on chemical security

    There’s been some good news from Congress recently about Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards, or CFATS. The National Association of Manufacturers reports:

    The Senate last week passed H.R. 2892, the Department of Homeland Security’s appropriations bill, which included a one-year extension of department’s authority over security for chemical facilities potentially threatened by terrorist attacks. This one-year extension helps continue the progress that the agency and chemical industry have made in implementing safety and security regulations adopted in 2007, the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards. (CFATS).

    The House has also passed a one-year extension, and the approach is far superior to the permanent legislation passed by the House Homeland Security Committee, H.R. 2868, the Chemical Facility Antiterrorism Act. That seemingly well-intentioned piece of legislation would U.S. production and storage of chemicals more burdensome and costly while providing no benefit public safety or national security.

    Bill Allmond, vice president of government relations at the Society of Chemical Manufacturers and Affiliates (SOCMA), put it well: “As we have argued for the past several months, Congress needs to address the October 2009 CFATS deadline expeditiously. Because the House appears, so far, to be more interested in passing controversial amendments like inherently safer technology (IST) to the existing regulations rather than make the rules permanent, this extension is the most responsible action.”

    Link to original story: Chemical Security: Keeping A Good Start Going. More reporting on this issue may be read by clicking on Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards.

  • Raj Goyle’s lecturing at Wichita State University sporadic

    Raj Goyle, a Democratic member of the Kansas House of Representatives, has recently announced that he is a candidate for the U.S. Congress seat for the fourth district of Kansas. That’s the seat being vacated by Todd Tiahrt.

    His website, in announcing his candidacy, states: “In addition to his legislative duties, Goyle serves as a lecturer at Wichita State University.”

    Past versions of his campaign website have him mentioning “… the same values that guide me every day in my career as a lecturer at Wichita State University, attorney, and active member of the Wichita community.” (emphasis added)

    While perhaps satisfying the technical description of a lecturer at Wichita State University, his career as that is spotty. According to records received from WSU, Goyle was a lecturer teaching a single class in the university’s honors program during the Fall 2006 semester. According to the same records, he hasn’t worked at WSU since. He’s scheduled to teach a class in the Fall 2009 semester, again a single class in the honors program.

    His work schedule for the semester he was employed by WSU was light. The Fall 2006 class, titled “Politics/Public Policy” met from 1:00 to 2:45 on Wednesdays. The class scheduled for Fall 2009 is titled “White House” and will meet from 1:00 to 3:00, again only on Wednesdays.

    Here’s another quote from Goyle’s campaign website: “In teaching at Wichita State I am helping to educate and shape our city’s youth while maintaining a deep commitment to public service and civic involvement.”

    The clear intent of these statements is to represent Goyle as someone actively and continuously employed by the university. Someone with a career, in Goyle’s own words. An examination of his record, however, leads to a different conclusion.

  • Inherently Safer Technology (IST) not always that

    Currently Congress is considering new regulations for chemical plants — Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards or CFATS — that will, if enacted, require substitution of technologies believed to be less vulnerable to terrorist attack.

    These regulations would affect facilities in addition to those we usually picture when thinking of chemical plants. The Wichita water treatment plant, for example, could be affected.

    The problem is that chemical manufacturing and processing is a complicated matter, and mandates that force the use of one chemical instead of another can have consequences that lead to less safety.

    An example of this may be found in the study Petroleum Refiners & Inherently Safer Technology: The Realities of Hydrofluoric and Sulfuric Acid. (I recommend reading the executive summary.) It’s from the National Petrochemical & Refiners Association, a national trade association.

    Proponents of IST would like oil refineries to switch to sulfuric acid as a safer alternative to hydrofluoric acid. This sounds like a reasonable measure, until you dig a little deeper. Then, you’ll find this:

    The alkylation process takes roughly 250 times more sulfuric acid than hydrofluoric acid to achieve the same result; therefore, a forced switch to sulfuric acid would result in a significant increase in transportation and transfer of the substance. For a 10,000 barrel per day alkylation unit, this equates to one to two truckloads of hydrofluoric acid delivered to the refinery each month, compared to three to four truckloads of regenerated sulfuric acid coming in and three to four truckloads of spent sulfuric acid going out each day.

    This is an example of how seemingly small shifts in technology can have a big impact. In this case, many more trucks carrying a still-dangerous acid would be on our roads and highways.

    There’s also a cost consideration: “A mandate for a refinery to switch from hydrofluoric acid to sulfuric acid will result in capital and design costs between $45 and $150 million dollars per refinery and an increase in operating costs of between 200 and 400 percent.”

    As all refineries would face these costs, it’s very likely that these costs would be passed on to consumers. Except: foreign refiners would not be subject to these expensive technology requirements. This raises the possibility of the United States importing gasoline in large quantities — an unintended consequence that I don’t believe Congress intends.

  • Homeland Security may impose new regulations on agriculture

    At the Kansas Meadowlark, there’s some video about Chemical facility anti-terrorism standards.

    The video is from recent Congressional hearings, and is valuable for its explanation of Inherently Safer Technologies, or IST. Click on Homeland Security may impose new regulations on agriculture for the video and commentary.

  • It’s time to audit the Federal Reserve Bank

    I received a press release from the Libertarian Party of Kansas announcing their support for legislation introduced by U.S. Representative Ron Paul that would “audit the centralized/privatized banks that make up the Federal Reserve System.”

    “The secretive FR [Federal Reserve] is a monetary oligarchy and an unelected monopoly that has control of credit, interest, volume and value of our currency. Until the people regain control of their money, bankers and not the government, will control the situation and our property,” says Al Terwelp, Vice Chair of the Libertarian Party of Kansas. “We must have the ability to search for the truth in FR practices and once it is found only then can we exercise justice for all. Without openness, our Republic’s existence is in jeopardy, for every dollar, every citizen, every issue of monetary, social and foreign policy is connected to the hegemony that is the Federal Reserve.”

    Personally, I find that most people have no idea of what the Federal Reserve does, or that it creates money out of thin air. It doesn’t even have to print it, as all it has to do is make some computerized ledger entries, and there’s new some money.

    Rep. Paul’s bill that would requre the audit of the Fed, HR 1207, has 237 co-sponsors in the House, including Kansas’ Tiahrt, Moran, and Jenkins. Rep. Dennis Moore of Johnson County is not a sponsor.

    Rep. Paul has a resource page with much information about the legislation and the need for it at Audit the Federal Reserve: HR 1207 and S 604.

  • In the world of chemical security, the real world

    A post on a blog sponsored by the National Association of Manufacturers explains a few of the problems with the proposed Chemical facility anti-terrorism standards legislation now making its way through Congress.

    One of the issues mentioned in the post In the World of Chemical Security, the Real World is the threat of excessive litigation:

    “But there are problems with the proposals, as he makes clear. He cites the ‘private right of action,’ i.e., encouraging litigation against companies as a parallel regulatory process.”

    Unlike environmental statutes, CFATS is not a series of prescriptive statutory measures with which compliance is mandatory, like emission standards or discharge limitations, and therefore it is much more difficult for an outsider — whether it be a citizen or judge — to ascertain if a standard is being met or to decide what needs to be done to address an alleged deficiency.