Full Interview (MP3)

The post Interview: The Discovery of Freedom appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

I credit lawmakers in Missouri for being forthcoming about the fact that the purpose of this tax increase is to generate tax revenue, not to discourage bad behavior. Lawmakers often attempt to discourage smoking on moral, ethical or public health grounds with higher taxes, but that’s not the issue here — money is. No matter the reason for higher cigarette taxes, though, this policy won’t solve the state’s money problems. The tax increase will cause smokers to buy fewer cigarettes. Some will smoke less as a result, and others will quit entirely. Their personal health may benefit, but they won’t contribute any cigarette tax revenue.

Visit the Southeast Missourian’s site to read the rest. And, if you’d like to read more on the subject, check out an earlier commentary about cigarette taxes by former Show-Me Institute editor Tim Lee.

The post Cigarette Taxes Won’t Solve Missouri’s Budget Problems appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Justus’ proposal will make it at least 50 percent harder (and that much more expensive) for Missourians to bring an issue to statewide voters. She proposes requiring that groups collect signatures from registered voters in all congressional districts. That would mean groups would have to collect, at minimum, signatures from an additional 45,000 registered Missouri voters. That’s at least another $100,000 in expenses. Why would Justus want to restrict this process further, so that only the most wealthy individuals and groups can participate?

Be sure to read the whole thing! And thanks to Brandon Holmes at Citizens in Charge for alerting us to this story.

The post Protecting the Initiative Process appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

If you’re debating whether you should apply, take a look at some of the highlights that Caitlin Hartsell, our Koch Fellow from 2009, produced during her time working here for the eight-week program (and later, as a Show-Me Institute research assistant):

• Op-ed: What Does the State Income Tax Cost Missourians?
• Report: NorthSide Project Passes Board of Aldermen
• Op-ed: Filling the Cavities in Missouri’s Dental Care
• Op-ed: Well-Intentioned Autism Bill Also Carries Negative Consequences
• Speech: A Panel on the Best and Worst of the 2010 Legislative Session
• Video Production: Show-Me Institute Free-Market Field Trip No. 3: Ticket Scalping
• Show-Me Daily: 92 blog entries

Here are more highlights from our 2008 Koch Fellow, Matt Simpson:

• Op-ed: Flood Relief Establishes Perverse Incentives
• Missourinet interview: Controversial proposal would deny government aid to flood victims
• Post-Dispatch blog citation: The flip side of flood aid
• Show-Me Daily: 30 blog entries
• Show-Me Quarterly: Front cover photo

This just scratches the surface of all the research that they, and our other interns, helped out with behind the scenes.

So, once again, if you’d like to have the chance to dive into Missouri public policy this summer, be sure to apply to be a Charles G. Koch Summer Fellow. After the Jan. 31 deadline, it may be too late.

The post Students: Apply to Work at the Show-Me Institute This Summer! appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Audrey’s report is now available on the Show-Me Institute website, detailing how the property value amounts that NorthSide reported to the state appear to be overvalued by more than half a million dollars in comparison to the certificate of value amounts filed with the city of St. Louis.

For more of Audrey’s work covering the north side redevelopment project in St. Louis, follow the article links on her staff bio page.

The post Report Detailing North Side Redevelopment Tax Credit Application Discrepancies Now Online appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Audrey will be talking about the use of state tax credits for redevelopment in the north side of the city of St. Louis, and about how the tax credit application formally submitted by redevelopment company NorthSide Regeneration LLC appears to have overstated the value of its properties by more than half a million dollars. We’ll be posting much more about these topics in the near future, but in the meantime be sure to listen to Audrey address them on the radio tomorrow morning.

The post Tune In to Hear Audrey Spalding on KMOX Friday Morning! appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The post Radio Appearance Imminent! appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Research assistant John Payne will be a guest on the Freeman Bosely Jr. morning show on KATZ 1600 AM, once again talking about the St. Louis–area Metro transit system. His segment is scheduled to start somewhere between 11:00 and 11:15 a.m. If you want to listen but are not in St. Louis (or don’t have a radio), you can listen online at www.gospel1600.com. You can also read John’s op-ed about MetroLink expansion and watch his recent appearance on Fox 2 news.

Also today, policy analyst Dave Roland will be the keynote speaker at the Missouri Libertarian Party Convention in Jefferson City! He’ll be speaking about the importance of capturing the hearts and minds of Missourians in our efforts to spread the ideas of liberty and take practical steps toward increased freedom. The Show-Me Institute doesn’t engage in electoral politics, but we’re always happy to share our ideas with others — so, Democrats, Republicans, Greens, what have you, be sure to let us know when you’d like us to speak at your events, as well. We’d love to talk to you.

The post Turn On, Tune In, Drop By appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

For more information about St. Louis transit, read Payne’s recent op-ed about MetroLink, which also ran on the Riverfront Times blog and in the St. Louis Business Journal. His commentary attracted some attention from a Metro board member, who responded on our blog, followed by a short rejoinder by Payne.

The Show-Me Institute ran a trio of pieces in October 2008 about transit funding in St. Louis, considering the problem from different angles. We’ve also been fortunate enough to publish a few pieces analyzing Kansas City light rail plans, by transit scholar Randal O’Toole and policy analyst David Stokes. Although these latter pieces considered the issue specifically as it relates to the Kansas City area, many of the broad observations about light rail costs and efficiency apply just as well to St. Louis.

The post SMI Research Assistant John Payne on FOX 2 tonight at 10:00 appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

We recently received a thoughtful response from Hugh Scott, III, who has been a member of Metro’s Board of Commissioners for nearly five years, commenting on Payne’s op-ed. In the interest of furthering dialogue about important issues like public transit funding, his entire letter appears unedited below:

As even noted anti-tax advocate Glenn Beck acknowledged on his show yesterday, (2/22/10) some taxes are necessary. In the case of public transit, I would maintain that taxes supporting these systems inure to the economic benefit of metropolitan areas. Public transit enables people to commute to jobs and transit centers provide a critical mass of customers for businesses located near them. Not only does Metro employ 2000 St. Louisans but it assists countless thousands of workers to get to jobs in healthcare, retail, manufacturing and distribution. For many of these commuters, no public transit would mean no job.

Show-Me Research Assistant John Payne misses the mark in his article, “Adding New MetroLink Lines Too Costly, Inefficient.” While he tacitly agrees that public transit is important for our community, he advocates opposition to the proposed referendum for a ½ cent sales tax on the April ballot. The focus of his criticism is on the part of the proposal which suggests some the addition of light rail corridors. Extending light rail is however, not the major thrust of the proposal.

Throughout its history, BiState (Metro) has not had sufficient dedicated taxes to support its operations. It has relied on the beneficence of the City of St. Louis and the adjoining Missouri and Illinois counties, the States of Missouri and Illinois, and the Federal government to provide operating subsidies. Some of these entities have been generous over the years. Others have been quite parsimonious. In all cases, awarding of funds is arbitrary and Metro must beg for money from its stakeholders on an annual basis. If Metro is expected to operate in a business-like manner, it must have a stable reliable source of revenue. This, in fact, is what the April 6 ballot proposal is really all about.

When the last tax measure failed in a very close vote in November of 2008, Metro was forced to cut 40% of its bus and train service and 400 staff members. This resulted in the loss of at least 5000 jobs in our community. While half of these cuts were quickly restored due to the receipt of emergency funds from St. Clair County and the State of Missouri, deeper cuts will be necessary if the proposed tax is not approved by the voters. With the approval of the new tax, pre-2009 service will be restored and the current system will be able to operate on a stable financial footing for the first time in memory.

Other short term (1-5 year) priorities include implementation of a bus rapid transit system similar to the “higher speed bus routes” advocated by Payne, adding amenities such as a “smart card” fare system, and beginning planning for more light rail. These programs will be implemented only after the pre 2009 service is in place and only when funds are available. The five year plan does not call for construction of new light rail corridors.

Putting a light rail extension in service will take a minimum of ten years. It will also require large amounts of federal funds in order to build. Metro does not believe that the community should “foot the bill” for any Metrolink expansions without the majority of the funds being provided by the federal government. Instead Metro is asking for funds to begin the planning process so that when federal funds become available for light rail expansion, St. Louis will be in line. It only makes good sense to spend some money on planning. Otherwise, federal money for light rail will go to other cities and St. Louis will be left out.

Payne tries to make a case for increased bus service as opposed to more light rail. He asserts that buses are a better form of transit because they are cheaper and provide more flexible route opportunities. This was precisely the argument made by former BiState CEO, Col. Rudolph Smyser in the 1960’s when he ordered the shutdown of the last of the street car lines in St. Louis.

While it may be argued that buses are superior to light rail from an economic standpoint, flexibility of routes is precisely the problem with buses. Businesses which might prosper by being near a transit stop do not locate near bus stops because a bus stop might easily move to another street or corner. Many non-transit dependent customers will not ride buses because it is often difficult to know where the bus is going. With streetcars, subways and light rail, one need only look at a map showing landmarks or look down the track to know where the car is headed.

In some ways, Metro has successfully mitigated the confusion caused by changing bus routes by creating a hub and spoke system integrating buses and light rail. Thus a person who boards a bus that says “Clayton Station” can expect to travel to the Clayton Metrolink station. Similarly, a passenger who boards our most heavily traveled bus route, Grand Avenue, can be confident the bus will travel north or south on Grand without deviating. In a sense, our increased market share in buses may be in part attributed to our lack of flexibility with routes not the reverse.

In conclusion, Metro has built a world class transit system which integrates bus and rail service quite successfully. While our population density might be low for light rail travel our market share compared to peer group cities is very high. Light rail continues to gain popularity from non-transit dependent riders and nationally, our market share is in the top three cities in our ten city peer group. The April ballot proposal is about preserving this fine system. Our first priority must be to stabilize the existing system. Future planning is always important but it comes further down the list of priorities.

The post Metro Board Member Responds to Show-Me Institute Op-Ed appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The economy has been tough lately, as politicians respond to fiscal crisis by spending ever larger amounts of tax revenue and still clamor for more. It’s important to be frugal, but we must remind you that although the economy is still stalling, our work in fighting for fiscal sanity is not in recession. It’s more important than ever that friends of freedom stand against the latest tide of public opinion — against economic illiteracy and government handouts, against higher taxes and even higher spending, against the kind of burdensome regulation and red tape that hampers market growth and prevents price mechanisms from allocating labor and capital efficiently. If we want the economy to recover, it will take a powerful voice calling for economic freedom. The more people who support the Show-Me Institute’s efforts, the louder that voice will grow.

It doesn’t take much. A donation of as little as $25 will help us: conduct the best in academic-caliber economic research; spread the word about the value of free markets and individual liberty through speaking events, our websites, and in group discussions; promote government transparency and accountability; and reach out to the many people who are on our side but don’t yet know we’re here. The best ideas in the world only provide results if people hear them and act on them, and that’s more likely to happen if we stand together.

So, during this holiday season, if you’re trying to find a gift for the person who has everything, try an investment in freedom. The rest of our prosperity hinges on that freedom. It’s also the kind of gift you can give to yourself.

If you’d like to know more about the ways in which you can help the Show-Me Institute fulfill its mission of “advancing liberty by promoting market solutions for Missouri public policy,” contact Rebecca Bruchhauser: (314) 726-5655 or rebecca.bruchhauser@showmeinstitute.org

Thanks.

The post Become a Friend of Freedom appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Releasing the annual report so late in the year has become something of an unintended tradition — albeit one that we firmly intend to break for 2009’s report. Here’s what I wrote two years ago:

Most non-profit organizations release their annual reports much earlier in the year than this. Ours would have been out sooner, too, but we decided to commission a thorough independent audit — to make sure everything was fully on track and accounted for during our first full year of operations. We had most of the report ready to go several weeks ago, but we didn’t want to issue an incomplete profile. Some things are worth the wait.

And here’s what I wrote last year:

We had hoped to release this a few months ago, but a string of delays kept pushing it back in our schedule. We’re planning to begin working on the 2008 annual report in the next month or two, so that we can have most of the content ready by year’s end, then add the financials and other finishing touches in early 2009. That should allow for a much earlier release date next year.

So, what was the problem this year? Any guesses? Yes, once again, the audit took much longer than anybody expected, and after we finally got the numbers back we ended up making several changes to the work we had already completed on the annual report. I think that the end result is pretty great, though, if I do say so myself. And I’m particularly happy we managed to include a nice feature on our intern program and our free-market book club — including an excellent group photo on the cover that includes a collage of many of the books that the club read during 2008.

The Show-Me Institute had some outstanding accomplishments during 2008, and a large part of that success can be attributed directly to the people reading this blog, who are engaged by our ideas and research. We hope you’ll continue to help us finish up 2009 in style, and next year, I hope we won’t have to wait this long to tell you all about it!

The post At Long Last, Our 2008 Annual Report! appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

I’ve also posted it below, for your convenience. This playlist consists of seven separate parts. After each individual part has finished playing, the playlist should automatically load the subsequent part until the sequence has finished. You may also choose to view any individual part on its own:

Part 1 (10:00) | Part 2 (10:03) | Part 3 (9:47) | Part 4 (10:01) | Part 5 (9:59) | Part 6 (10:00) | Part 7 (5:58)

The post “Little Pink House” Author Jeff Benedict Tells Story of Infamous Kelo Eminent Domain Case appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

So, be sure to stay tuned to Policy Pulse as Audrey and a few other talented writers bring you perceptive coverage of events that you won’t always be able to find in other media outlets.

Here are some recent headlines, to get you started:

• McKee eschews media, makes pitch for NorthSide development
• Some north side properties kept vacant for more than a decade
• Health care protests stay cordial
• Anti–eminent domain activists join north side community group’s cause
• Earmarked millions now a little more transparent
• Eleven school districts get day in court
• High-speed rail predicted to travel much slower than advertised
• McCaskill fields questions about health care bill in Hillsboro
• North Side community group questions TIF project’s validity
• Smoking ban will likely be put to county voters
• Community group wary of north Saint Louis redevelopment plan
• Gingrich presents health care reform ideas in Saint Louis
• Health care forum draws hundreds, mostly opposed to federal reform legislation
• Legislative fix misleads school district budgets

The post Policy Pulse Coverage Highlights Crucial Issues appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The study finds that although Missouri was once the unquestionable leader in terms of population and GDP, Tennessee gradually caught up throughout the 1900s in almost every economic metric. Although many factors certainly contribute to Tennesse’s growth and Missouri’s relative stagnation, one of the most illuminating pieces of data is that Missouri levies a state income tax on its citizens, while Tennessee does not.

Empirical research shows that tax policy has a marginal but significant effect on how people choose where to live — voting with their feet to minimize their tax burdens. Economic growth tends to flow to areas with lower tax burdens, and although Tennessee has a higher sales tax than Missouri does, its overall tax burden is unquestionably lower. If Missourians want their state to once again become an economic powerhouse, they should encourage a sensible tax policy that’s both low and consistent, and that eliminates as much dead-weight loss as possible. That means thinking hard about eliminating Missouri’s state income tax.

Read the entire case study here.

The post New Study Compares Tax Systems in Missouri, Tennessee appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Governments should devote stimulus funds to charter school expansion and encourage public private partnerships to ensure efficient use of the funds. Charter schools have illustrated the ability to improve the quality of education in the communities they serve. Yet, across the nation, these schools struggle to finance new construction or capital improvements.

I’d rather that the current federal stimulus program didn’t exist at all — the best thing government officials could do to jump start the economy would be to cut both spending and taxes to the bone — but as long as the spending is going to happen, providing kids an escape route from failing public schools is a pretty good cause.

The post School Choice Garners Increasing Support From All Political Quarters appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Be sure to read each of the three installments:

• How much freedom do charter schools deserve?
• Who do charters educate?
• Are charters a drain on traditional public schools?

This is the kind of debate that’s actually worth having — one that relies on data and careful argumentation, rather than bluster and hand-waving.

The post L.A. Times Charter School Debate appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Government, preferably local governmental units, would give each child, through his parents, a specified sum to be used solely in paying for his general education; the parents would be free to spend this sum at a school of their own choice, provided it met certain minimum standards laid down by the appropriate governmental unit. Such schools would be conducted under a variety of auspices: by private enterprises operated for profit, non profit institutions established by private endowment, religious bodies, and some even by governmental units.

About a year before his death, Reason interviewed Friedman about the education reform legacy he had instigated:

I want vouchers to be universal, to be available to everyone. They should contain few or no restrictions on how they can be used. We need a system in which the government says to every parent: “Here is a piece of paper you can use for the educational purposes of your child. It will cover the full cost per student at a government school. It is worth X dollars towards the cost of educational services that you purchase from parochial schools, private for-profit schools, private nonprofit schools, or other purveyors of educational services. You may add from your own funds to the voucher if you wish to and can afford to.” (I try to avoid calling government schools public schools because I think that’s a very misleading term.)

As to the benefits of universal vouchers, empowering parents would generate a competitive education market, which would lead to a burst of innovation and improvement, as competition has done in so many other areas. There’s nothing that would do so much to avoid the danger of a two-tiered society, of a class-based society. And there’s nothing that would do so much to ensure a skilled and educated work force.

Friedman also expanded on his arguments in favor of school choice in the 1980s PBS television series “Free to Choose.” The episode of this series dealing with education is available online, broken into six separate video clips. The first is embedded below:

Be sure to watch the rest, too! It’s well worth the time of anybody who cares about improving educational opportunities for all children.

The post Milton Friedman’s Vision for School Choice appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The embedded video below is a playlist consisting of five separate parts. After each individual part has finished playing, the playlist should automatically load the subsequent part until the sequence has finished.

You may also choose to view any individual part on its own:
Part 1 (9:22) | Part 2 (9:20) | Part 3 (9:13) | Part 4 (9:57) | Part 5 (10:01)

During Hoxby's trip to Saint Louis, she also spent a few minutes speaking with the Show-Me Institute about some of the key points contained in her lecture. In this interview, Hoxby explains the benefits of charter schools, outlines the challenges that charter schools currently face, points out the reasons for success in many charters, and more.

The embedded video below is a playlist consisting of two separate parts. After the first part has finished playing, the playlist should automatically load the second part.

You may also choose to view either individual part on its own:
Part 1 (9:08) | Part 2 (7:59)

This same interview can also be viewed in seven separate sections, each addressing a different educational question:

What are the benefits of charter schools?
What are the challenges that charter schools face?
How do traditional public schools and charter schools compare?
What are the reasons that some charter schools succeed?
What constitutes adequate funding for public schools?
What are the current barriers to school choice in the United States?
How does collective bargaining affect quality teacher retention?

The post The Promise and Performance of Charter Schools appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Parents will now have more say in where their kids can go to school in the fall. That’s because of a recent bill that passed in the Georgia house. House Bill 251 makes it easier for parents to transfer students to the school of their choice.

The article also includes video of the TV station’s news clip about this bill, so be sure to head over there to watch.

The post Georgia House Passes School Choice Bill appeared first on Show-Me Institute.