President’s Visit to Springfield Sets Stage for Tax Reform Fights

On Wednesday President Donald Trump visited Springfield, Mo., and delivered a speech on tax policy that, by most accounts, was basically what was expected. The assumption had been that the President would advance a general vision on reforming the federal corporate and individual income taxes, with an emphasis on the former. The President did make clear that he wanted corporate income taxes reduced by about half — a reduction that would move the U.S. from its station in the rareified air of practically punitive corporate over-taxation to being one of the most competitive countries in the world to set up a business. He was more vague on individual income tax reforms.

You can find video of the speech here. While the President’s talk was about federal taxation, I hope that his visit to Missouri will also renew the needed discussion for tax reform at the state and local levels as well. Indeed, 2018 could be a big year for tax reform nationally and in Missouri. Let’s hope.

Evidence from Across the Country: Economic Development Subsidies Don’t Work

The Los Angeles Times’ Pulitzer Prize winning columnist Michael Hiltzik published a piece that observes exactly what we at The Show-Me Institute have been saying for years: economic development subsidies, “often are an unnecessary bonus to companies that already have made a site location decision based on more important factors.” Think of Burns & McDonnell, whose development partner already owned the land adjacent to their existing world headquarters when they sought subsidies to build a new HQ.

Hiltzik even quotes urban economist Richard Florida, whose call to cater to “creative class” millennials was swallowed hook, line, and sinker by Kansas City and Saint Louis politicians. Florida later recanted.

Hiltzik doesn’t pull any punches and ends his column with a repudiation of film tax credits, which Missouri wisely ended in 2013. The whole column is worth reading.

Could Illinois Be Missouri’s Role Model for School Choice?

Few would have guessed that Illinois would see private school choice before Missouri, but it might happen—and soon.

Illinois may adopt a tax-credit scholarship program this week as part of broader education funding reform. According to early reports, the program would be capped at $75 million in partial tax credits for those who donate towards private school scholarships.

While the plan still has to pass, there are some important lessons here for Missouri: Tax-credit scholarships can be bipartisan and they can help cash-strapped states. In fact, Mike McShane and Marty Lueken found that a tax-credit scholarship program potentially could save the state of Missouri up to $18 million per year. 

About All Those Airport Surveys

Polling indicates that building a new single terminal at Kansas City International Airport is unpopular, yet we seem inundated with surveys that purport to show that opinions are changing. It’s tough to say, because we don’t necessarily know if the information is trustworthy. What we do know, however, is not comforting.

In opinion survey research, the number of people surveyed is less important than randomness. A survey of 2,000 people who themselves decided to complete an online questionnaire, for example, may be less valuable than a survey of 200 people who were contacted at random. Without adequate randomization, survey results may over-represent the views of a group of passionate partisans.

Unscientific survey data—data lacking adequate randomization—has played a big role in the debate about whether or not to build a new single terminal at MCI. Some of it is due to passionate partisans; some of it is due to questionable reporting. Much if not all of it creates the sense that building a new terminal is more popular than it is.

Consider some questionable reporting. The Kansas City Business Journal published a front-page piece indicating that the average TSA wait time at MCI was 29 minutes. Anyone who has flown from Kansas City would be suspicious of that figure, and other average wait times should have suggested to reporters that the data was problematic. (Jacksonville and Phoenix airports both listed an average TSA wait time of zero!). Kevin Koster, who served on the Mayor’s Airport Terminal Advisory Group, was skeptical, and he followed up with his own research (see here and here). In short, the TSA reports that MCI’s actual average wait time was 3.63 minutes. The discrepancy is due to the fact that the Business Journal data came from a website in which travelers report their own wait times without any independent verification. The Business Journal basically relied on an online survey that has little or no scientific validity—perhaps travelers whose wait times were uncharacteristically long were overrepresented among the website’s respondents.

Even some of the other, likely scientifically valid polling that has been reported fails to meet the ethical standards set by the American Association of Public Opinion Researchers (AAPOR) because it does not disclose all the questions asked.

Then there is the Aviation Department’s own online survey. At the City Council’s August 10 Business Session, department officials provided an overview of their presentations to groups across Kansas City about the need for a new terminal. After their presentation (which included a long discussion of the Aviation Department’s own scientifically invalid survey of session attendees), Councilman Jermaine Reed offered a startling admission [starts 19:26],

I can tell you that every time I fly I certainly try to get on the survey and make sure I mark everything bad about the airport. I don’t say anything good. I put no, no, one, one, zero, zero. What can we improve? Everything.  In my comments so … I shouldn’t probably tell you that. If you see the comments it is probably me.

Proponents for a new terminal are aware of public misgivings. Sadly, rather than having the serious and legitimate concerns of skeptics addressed, we have seen favoritism, secrecy, and now questionable polling that creates the misleading impression that the public is on board with their plans. Kansas City deserves better. 

Bevy of Laws Come into Effect Today

It’s August 28th, and for policy nerds — and especially taxpayers — this is an important day. Today is the day that most of the bills passed in the regular session are becoming law, which depending on your perspective and depending on the legislation, could be a great or terrible thing. Missourinet has an excellent rundown of some of the higher profile bills now in effect, and Marshall Griffin also has another excellent summary, with links, at the St. Louis Public Radio website. Check them both out to get a flavor of what is changing.

Have questions or comments about any of these legislative items? Leave them in the comments below. 

Airport Proposals Fly while the Public Feels Grounded

Both Kansas City and Saint Louis are considering major changes to each of their biggest public assets: their airports. While the circumstances of each project are different, the inclination of some officials to avoid public scrutiny may sink both efforts. Regardless of the merits of any proposal, the process must remain open and transparent to taxpayers.

In Kansas City, the effort to spend $1.2 billion on a new single terminal has been limping along for years. Beset from the beginning by self-inflicted wounds from Aviation Department leadership and an aversion to open discussion (Mayor James recently tried to require elected officials to sign non-disclosure agreements about competing bids), the effort now appears to be racing toward a November election. Voter support is in no way assured.

In Saint Louis, a consortium of business interests and former city officials are moving forward with a privatization effort that has yet to be the subject of much public discussion. While free-market solutions are a worthwhile consideration for many public services, market decisions are only as good as the information available.

Why the secrecy over matters that are obviously of great public interest? If Kansas City and Saint Louis are developing good plans for managing, developing, or privatizing their airports, their leaders should be confident that they can defend the plans in the marketplace of ideas. If the plans are flawed, isn’t it better to expose the problems while there is still time to make adjustments?

One thing is certain. The longer deliberations are kept secret, the more the inference will grow that the officials leading the efforts have something to hide. It makes for an inauspicious start for what will, eventually and inevitably, become campaigns for public approval.

It’s a Good Idea for Mizzou to Cover Tuition for Low-Income Students, but the Reason May Surprise You

Earlier this week, the University of Missouri announced that it has created the Missouri Land Grant and Land Grant Honors scholarship programs. Both will cover all tuition and fees for eligible low-income Missouri residents.

I think this is a great idea, for one reason that is obvious, and for another that might be less so.

The obvious reason is that we have a public university system (note that the university’s name for the program harkens back to the “land grant” nature of Mizzou) to provide higher education to bright students who might not otherwise be able to afford it. This intuition is not new in America.

Thomas Jefferson, the father of the University of Virginia, himself wrote of students:

“that they should be called to that charge without regard to wealth, birth or other accidental condition or circumstance; but the indigence of the greater number disabling them from so educating, at their own expence, those of their children whom nature hath fitly formed and disposed to become useful instruments for the public, it is better that such should be sought for and educated at the common expence of all, than that the happiness of all should be confided to the weak or wicked.”

As college costs increase, our universities are pricing out many students who would thrive at them, but simply cannot afford the skyrocketing tuition. This program will work to solve that problem and we should laud it for that.

But the second reason why this program is a great idea is subtler.

In the past, efforts to try and help low income student attend college have had unintended consequences. Typically, states and the federal government have given low-income students scholarships, like Pell grants, or subsidized loans to help defray the cost of education. In response, many universities started to “price” these scholarships into the cost of tuition, banking on the fact that students will automatically be able to pay it, and this has driven up the cost of schooling.

Mizzou’s program is different. Rather than rely on outside funding, Mizzou is footing the bill itself. That means that any increase in the cost of providing an education is borne by Mizzou. This should provide a powerful disincentive for the school to become more expensive.

Now, the devil is always in the details, and the program isn’t launching for another school year, so we won’t know the full scope and effect of the program for some time. But if programs like these are representative of the type of bold thinking that university leaders are engaging in, Mizzou is putting itself on a much better path into the future.

Show-Me Now! How Can We Fix Teacher Pensions?

Is Missouri’s teacher pension system unfair? That’s the question Show-Me Institute’s Distinguished Fellow of Education Policy, James Shuls, asks in his latest essay. Shuls demonstrates how the system makes it possible for some individuals to receive more in benefits than they made in contributions and for others to receive less. Interestingly, teachers in our least-affluent school districts are often the ones getting short-changed. Shuls has proposed some options for reforming the system to make it more fair for all. Read more:

https://showmeinstitute.org/publication/public-pensions/missouris-teacher-pension-system-unfair

Support Us

The work of the Show-Me Institute would not be possible without the generous support of people who are inspired by the vision of liberty and free enterprise. We hope you will join our efforts and become a Show-Me Institute sponsor.

Donate
Man on Horse Charging