There Once Was a Dog From Newfoundland …

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

I believe there’s a connection between the state poet laureate and official state symbols — and someone else agrees! Writing in the Suburban Journals, Charles Mosley remarks that the governor honors animals and plants by designating them as official symbols, and that he likewise honors poets by conferring the title of poet laureate on them.

Mosley writes that these honors do less damage than other actions that elected officials could take. I agree that symbols and laureates don’t mess up the economy like some policies do, but the attitude they engender can still be harmful. We shouldn’t look to the state for approval of our accomplishments and opinions, nor should we ask the state to validate our favorite natural phenomena. If we give too much credence to state recognition, we may allow honor-seeking to distract us from more productive endeavors.

I recommend reading Mosley’s essay in full, especially his poem about sneezing. Even if it doesn’t inspire you to sympathy with ragweed sufferers, you’ll certainly come away with a greater sense of reverence for the English language.

“Missouri First”: Tax Credits Go From Bad to Worse

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

As Christine Harbin has convincingly argued, targeted tax incentives for businesses are a poor use of resources. When the state gives a tax credit to a particular company or industry, that recipient gains at the expense of everyone else.

Now here’s a worse idea: Fiddling with tax credit programs so that a larger percentage of available credits goes to companies that were located in Missouri to begin with (as opposed to out-of-state businesses that came here to get the tax break). If all companies in an industry have a chance at getting a tax credit, it’s possible that the most productive one will win it. It would still be a wasteful use of tax dollars, but the waste would at least be kept to a minimum. If, however, the tax credit program is rigged so that it favors preexisting Missouri companies, the state ends up picking a winner once, in singling out an industry for the subsidy, and then it makes yet another arbitrary choice based on location rather than merit. That compounds the inefficiency.

Terrific Op-Ed About Tort Law in Missouri

Posted on by David Stokes

Because the Show-Me Institute’s staff took some time off during the holidays, we missed writing about a few things that I might otherwise have jumped on. In the interest of catching up, I want to highlight this excellent piece by James Harris — whom I have had the pleasure of knowing for some time — that ran about a week ago in the Springfield News-Leader. I like how he puts the issue here:

Right now, having tort reform laws on the books puts us at a comparative advantage with other states and other nations when competing for new industries. The loss of these laws would put us at a disadvantage, discouraging companies from creating new jobs in Missouri which could be created more cheaply in other states.

I actually disagree with James on a related issue: that of judicial appointments in Missouri. However, I totally agree with every word he wrote in this piece. If the state Supreme Court strikes down the current tort laws that were enacted in 2005, it would be a disaster for Missouri in countless ways, especially economically. I won’t get too worked up, because I am optimistic that the court will agree that elected officials have a right to set limits on government actions, such as court verdicts.

If opponents of tort reform laws want to go back to the way it was in Missouri, they need to get people elected to office who run on rescinding the lower award limits and other reforms that were passed. After all, the officials elected in 2005 almost all ran on the issue of tort reform. The people of Missouri elected legislators who had proposed to limit awards, change venue laws, etc. If you want to change those laws, do it through the democratic process — not the courts.

See? I Don’t Oppose All Tax Credits

Posted on by Christine Harbin

I realize that I have been writing a lot lately about tax credits that I oppose. In this post, I’d like to identify one that I support: the Food Pantry Tax Credit (FPT). It’s a tax credit for individuals who donate cash or food supplies to a qualified food pantry. From a recent article published by Fox4KC:

The food pantry tax credit gives donors a tax credit worth 50 percent of their donation, up to $2,500. To qualify, donors must donate to a pantry that distributes food, not a bank that stores it.

The Food Pantry Tax Credit is a win-win for Missouri: Individuals can reduce their tax burden and food pantries can stay stocked throughout the year. Plus, unlike tax credits that are targeted to industries, the food pantry tax credit doesn’t favor certain parties over others.

Have a Merry Census

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

This article in the Southeast Missourian features quotes from Missouri officials about why people should participate in the Census. No one mentions the reason I find most compelling: The Constitution requires us to take a census every ten years. Still, all of the quotes are more germane than the talk about “portraits” and “stories” that we’ve heard from the Census Bureau lately. At least the article discusses how government will use the information that’s collected.

When you look at all the media coverage of the Census marketing campaign, it’s easy to forget that most people won’t receive their forms until the middle of March. With each new Census, there’s more advertising and it starts earlier — kind of like how stores try to stretch the holiday shopping season by bringing out the Christmas decorations earlier and earlier in the fall.

I hope it’s another 10 years before we encounter a vast campaign promoting the 2020 Census.

Bill Would Broaden Definition of “Service Dog”

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

H.B. 1293 would include dogs that perform therapeutic services under the legal definition of “service dog.” The current definition lists specific jobs that dogs can do — acting as a guide dog, a mobility dog, or a couple of others — and the change would grant dogs that perform other therapeutic services the same legal protection. Dogs that volunteers bring with them when they visit patients would still be excluded by the new definition.

This change would improve the law. Dogs are used to treat an increasing number of medical conditions, and confusion over which animals are really service dogs can lead to disputes. This was apparent this past year in Illinois, where an appeals court decided that a boy with autism may bring his dog to school. The school district had argued that the dog was just a pet and not a service dog.

We can’t expect legislators to keep up with every medical advance and to update the definition of “service dog” each time a dog is used in the treatment of another condition. It would be better to have a more general definition, like the one proposed in Missouri’s H.B. 1293.

Targeted Tax Credits Rear Their Ugly Head in the Missouri Legislature Again

Posted on by Christine Harbin

As Steve Walsh explains in an article on Missourinet, this time the industry targeted for tax credits is data centers.

From the article, we can see that support for this policy comes from those who would benefit most (i.e., rent-seeking behavior):

The push for the legislation comes from what is known as the Missouri Coalition for Data Centers, which is made up of businesses and local economic development agencies.

For reasons I’ve explained before on this very blog, targeted tax credits aren’t good policy. I’m beginning to feel like a broken record here!

Missouri should stop using targeted tax credits as an economic development policy, and instead let the free market decide which economic activities take place inside state borders. Officials should focus on creating tax policies that don’t favor one kind of business over another, such as reducing commercial property tax surcharges or corporate income taxes.

If other states decide to spend tax money to attract specific industries, be it filmmakers or data management centers, then Missouri shouldn’t feel the need to imitate them. To paraphrase Josh Smith’s comments on my recent post about tax credits to filmmakers, this is particularly true when Missourians: (1) are still able to get the benefits of the product by paying to receive the data management service; and, (2) don’t have to spend their tax money to entice the data management companies to locate here, resulting in a few obvious benefits.

Link via John Combest.

Columbia School Reluctant to Open More Single-Sex Classes

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

Field Elementary in Columbia offers optional single-sex classes, as does Carmen Trails Elementary in St. Louis county. But, unlike Carmen Trails, which added a grade to the program this year in response to parents’ demand, Field has no intention of expanding without proof that single-sex classes raise test scores.

Field will never get the proof it wants. To show that single-sex schooling improves student achievement, you would have to randomly assign some students to single-sex classes and others to coed classes. Otherwise, you can’t tell whether the students in the single-sex track are comparable to their peers in the coed track. Perhaps students who struggle are more likely to look for a change and to opt in to the single-sex classes. Or, it could be that the most involved parents seek out single-sex education, and that parental involvement gave those students an advantage. It’s impossible to sort out these factors as long as the program remains voluntary.

Will Missouri Districts Compete for Students?

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

Choice between school districts is up for consideration this legislative session.

Choice is a foreign concept for school districts, but it’s seen as normal in other parts of the public sector. For example, nobody has to go to a branch of the public library that’s assigned to them, nor do they have to buy stamps at the branch of the post office in their municipality.

I hope legislators will keep inter-district choice proposals simple and won’t create a lot of rules and exceptions. I’m thinking of Philadelphia, which has allowed inter-district choice for five years. There, only one district in each county can accept transferring students. Limits like that defeat the purpose of a choice program, which should aim to give everyone more options.

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