Session Notes: Obamacare’s Medicaid Expansion Fails Again

With the 2016 legislative session behind them, Missouri's legislature has once again rejected Obamacare's Medicaid expansion. Had it passed, the program would have added thousands of able-bodied, childless adults living above the poverty line to Missouri's welfare rolls, with the state picking up an increasing share of the cost in the years ahead. 

The legislature was right to reject the Medicaid expansion for a number of reasons—among them, the program's patient access and health outcome problems and its soaring cost to taxpayers. But one of the most important arguments against expanding welfare to the unimpoverished was captured by Ronald Reagan in testimony to Congress nearly 50 years ago. Reagan's admonition that "[w]e should measure welfare's success by how many people leave welfare, not by how many more are added" is probably the best-recognized line from that speech. But I'd like to quote another sentence that is at least as important:

It doesn't seem right to reduce a man's take-home pay with taxes and then send him a government dole which robs him of the feeling of accomplishment and dignity which comes from providing for his family by his own efforts.

It's a bad idea to create a new class of welfare recipients and graft them into a broken program like Medicaid, but it is an especially bad idea to substantively change the standard for who is supposed to be receiving welfare to begin with. Medicaid is broken, but even if it weren't, government shouldn't be freshly yoking millions of able-bodied Americans to the welfare state. 

Reform-minded free marketeers should look for ways to empower workers and widen their opportunities. Unfortunately, in too many ways, the "Affordable Care Act" does precisely the opposite. Congratulations to the legislature for holding firm against Obamacare.

Uber Under Threat in Saint Louis

The Metropolitan Taxicab Commission (MTC), which regulates for-hire vehicles (mainly taxis) in Saint Louis City and County, has attempted to put the brakes on ridesharing options since Lyft (an Uber competitor) tried to enter the local market in 2014. While pressure from local governments prompted the MTC to make reforms, talks between ridesharing companies and the MTC broke down completely in the summer of 2015. Uber simply went forward offering its services to the region’s residents, flouting the rules of the MTC.

In the past, when companies or individuals violated MTC policies, police in Saint Louis City and County enforced the commission’s rulings by ticketing drivers. That is, after all, how the region responded to Lyft in 2014. However, Saint Louis City has flatly refused to use its police to block Uber, and police in Saint Louis County haven’t done much either. While the MTC could have used its very limited law enforcement capacity to attack Uber in 2015, the commission found itself in the midst of a public relations nightmare, with the state legislature seemingly ready to step in and completely overhaul the MTC. As a result, Uber now operates in Saint Louis, the police do nothing, and the MTC (while reiterating that Uber is acting illegally) keeps its head down.

 Now that the state legislature has failed either to reform the MTC or implement statewide ridesharing regulations, and with the unprofessionalism of MTC commissioners fading into memory, the taxi commission is reportedly planning to remind everyone who runs this town. As the Riverfront Times reports, the commission will begin seeking out UberX drivers and citing them for operating without a commission license. If such an act does not prompt Uber to shut down its services in the region altogether, it may seriously diminish the number of people willing drive for the company.

Whether or not the MTC will follow through on its threats is an open question. But what Saint Louisans should recognize by this time is that Uber, operating outside the regulatory framework of the MTC, has provided an innovative new service for all Saint Louis residents for almost a year. Where is the evidence that Uber is dangerous? Where are the market failures that the MTC needs to correct? From what we’ve seen so far, it seems that the ridesharing market operates just fine without the MTC.       

Know-it-all Government Undermines Growth and Jobs

With strict new rules mandating overtime pay for aspiring professionals and others in mid-level managerial positions, the Obama administration is asking employers to hang out a sign that says, in effect: “We don’t want any go-getters around here. You are strictly forbidden to make any special efforts for this company on unpaid time.”

The U.S. Labor Department has extended mandatory overtime pay to more than four million white-collar workers, including some 100,000 workers in Missouri. A new ruling from the department more than doubles the weekly threshold for salaried workers exempt from overtime pay to $913 a week (or $47,476 a year), and it requires employers to pay time and a half to employees at or below the threshold for any week in which they work more than 40 hours.

With five hours of overtime pay, a salaried worker at the threshold level will go from making $913 in a week to $1,172.

That may sound good, but it reflects a fundamental lack of understanding of what leads to wage and job growth and upward mobility for workers. It sets a new high-water mark in government meddling in other people’s business—or businesses.

As the CEO of one restaurant chain points out, the new ruling will demote thousands of mid-level managers into “glorified crew members” whose overriding incentive is to log more time rather than get results and be rewarded with bonuses and promotions.

In calling for cumbersome timekeeping systems that will rein in those who see showing initiative and always doing more than the required minimum as a ticket to success, the new ruling restricts the freedom and flexibility of employers and a large portion of their front-line managers to come to mutually beneficial agreements on compensation and working hours.

Other unfortunate side-effects will also follow. According to a National Retail Federation study, the rule will cause employers to move about a third of salaried retail and restaurant workers to hourly status. Further, it will lead to reduced hours for many of those workers and a shift to hiring more temps.

The idea that government can force businesses to take money out of profits in order to pay more to different classes of workers is itself delusional. To force any business to pay more to a worker than his or her value to the enterprise is to ensure that the business will do its best to keep employment of such workers at an absolute minimum. Unlike governments, companies that can’t make money are unable to expand, and are subject to extinction. That is especially true for low-margin, hypercompetitive businesses such as hotels, restaurants, and retailing that have been especially critical of the ruling.

The White House is saying that millions of salaried workers will get a raise under the new overtime rule. However, according to the Federation of Independent Businesses, that is contradicted by the Labor Department’s forecasts of a decline in average pay rates of newly covered salaried workers of about 5.3% in 2017.

To paraphrase Churchill, the Obama administration’s plan to order up a raise for middle-class Americans through an administrative edict is as foolish as the man who stands in a bucket and expects to lift himself up by pulling on the handle.

In fact, the administration’s plan is worse than that. At least the man who pulls on the bucket handle does not descend to a lower level. But that is exactly what will happen through the ministrations of our know-it-all government.

Missouri State Parks Floating the Idea of Crowding Out Private Enterprise

Small business owners are used to competition.  Most know who their main competitors are. They also know that if they do not continue to offer a great service or a great product, they will soon lose customers to their competition. What most small businesses don’t expect—or at least what they shouldn’t have to expect—is competition from their government. Yet, tax-supported competition is what canoe-rental companies in southern Missouri will likely be facing soon.

As the Associated Press reports, Missouri State Parks is planning to open a $52 million facility in Shannon County, and the parks department would like to provide canoe-rentals to park goers. The department purchased a piece of property formerly known as Camp Zoe. The campground was seized by the DEA in 2012 and later sold by the Department of Natural Resources to Missouri State Parks for $640,000.

Launching canoes into the river is not as simple as buying a piece of land at an auction. Businesses must have a permit for each canoe, and the number of canoes is limited. Therefore, the parks department will either have to purchase an existing canoe company and take over the company’s permits or attempt to wrestle permits away from an existing company. In either scenario, the government is poised to crowd out private enterprise with the financial backing of state taxpayers.

It is quite possible that the family-owned canoe rental place you love (Mine is Windy’s) could be put out of business by the good intentions of public servants. While parks and recreation may seem like a natural place for the state to offer services, it is important to realize that when the state takes on a larger role providing recreational activities, it crowds out private businesses that are already providing these services.

Is a New Mississippi River Bridge Worth $60 Million?

Plans are underway to replace an aging bridge that carries US Route 54 across the Mississippi River at Louisiana, Missouri. The existing bridge (the Champ Clark Bridge) was built in the 1920s and is in such poor shape that MoDOT has placed extensive weight and speed restrictions to ensure safety. Under a new proposal, Missouri, Illinois, and the federal government would spend $60 million on a replacement, with split of $25 million, $25 million, and $10 million, respectively. But is such an expenditure justified for Missouri?

To explore this question, we first need to look at traffic on the bridge. Before MoDOT placed weight restrictions, about 4,000 vehicles used the Champ Clark Bridge every day. That’s about as much as a lightly used urban street, and it’s low for a Mississippi River crossing. For example, bridges at Hannibal and Quincy each carry between 15,000 and 17,000 vehicles per day. Also, according to the Census Bureau, only four Missourians living in Pike County, Missouri (where the bridge is located) commuted to work in Pike County, Illinois. Actually, that estimate was within the margin of error, meaning it is possible that no one who lives in the county on the Missouri side of the Champ Clark Bridge works in the county on the Illinois side. About 500 residents of Pike County, Illinois, work in Pike County, Missouri. This low traffic makes sense when one notes that on the Missouri side there is only the small city of Louisiana (population 3,300) and the Illinois side of river is primarily farmland. Additionally, commodity flows are generally routed to the north or south of the Champ Clark Bridge.

Given the low traffic level on the Champ Clark Bridge, and the very few commuters who live in Missouri and commute to Illinois, a new Mississippi River bridge is likely to have limited positive impact for Missouri. The bridge’s replacement, therefore, is a perfect opportunity for Missouri to explore the option of tolling. Assuming the $60 million cost estimate is correct, a toll of around $2.50 per vehicle would be able to pay for bridge in 30 years, assuming existing drivers were willing to pay for the convenience of a Mississippi River bridge in that area. And if they are not, it calls into question the need for a bridge, with or without a toll. By placing a toll on the bridge, those who benefit greatly from the new bridge can fund its replacement without much, if any, additional strain on MoDOT’s or IDOT’s finances. It would be a fair way of funding a new bridge, and was in fact the method used to fund the construction of the Champ Clark Bridge in the first place.

The bottom line is that paying a new bridge on US Route 54 may not be worth it for Missouri, but it may be worth it for those who would actually use the bridge. The best way to find out whether that is the case is to explore the tolling option.

No Issue at MCI for American Airlines

Multiple news outlets have reported that passengers at airports across the country have seen increased wait times due to short-staffing at the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). We addressed this matter in a post just yesterday.

On Thursday, according to Reuters, an American Airlines executive testified before a congressional subcommittee that “airport screening delays have caused more than 70,000 American Airlines customers and 40,000 checked bags to miss their flights this year.”

Kansas City International Airport (MCI) uses a private security firm rather than the TSA, and I wrote to American Airlines to ask if they tracked the number of flights missed as MCI due to security. Their media representative quickly responded that they do track it, “but at the current time, we haven’t seen an issue at MCI for American.”

Proponents of building a new, $1.2 billion terminal at MCI are going to show pictures of as many long lines as they can at MCI to justify the expense. But there are long lines all over the country—even in new, single-terminal airports. At least for one airline, MCI is not seeing the problems that are occurring elsewhere.

Long Security Lines? Not at MCI

The Transportation Security Agency (TSA) has been telling travelers to expect longer lines at the airport this summer. Lines at security checkpoints have been longer than usual across the country, but not at Kansas City International Airport (MCI).

Why not? Certainly, size is a consideration. MCI is a mid-sized airport and not a hub like Chicago’s O’Hare airport. But there's more to it. According to The Chicago Tribune (emphasis added):

Private contractors also work well for certain types of airports—Kansas City, for example, has a terminal with multiple checkpoints, and workers can be shifted quickly depending on need, the [airport management consultant Steven] Baldwin report found. Neither San Francisco nor Kansas City has reported the lines seen at O'Hare and Midway.

This should not be surprising. Regular readers of this blog know that we’ve been impressed with private screening and the multi-terminal design for some time. And we suspect most people who fly share this view.

An expensive new terminal may be popular among Kansas City political leaders and their developer cronies, but it is unlikely to improve wait times, convenience, or safety.

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