Page 831 – Show-Me Institute

Webster County at Risk of Being Sucked Dry by Ethanol

Posted on September 11, 2008May 5, 2026 by Jacob Voss

On Wednesday, an appellate court heard arguments about the proposed $165 million ethanol plant for Webster County. The Springfield News-Leader highlights the case. What it basically comes down to is an ongoing feud between Gulfstream Bioflex Energy (GPE) and The Citizens for Groundwater Protection (CGP). This is the second Missouri plant that the two groups have fought over, the first fight occurring in 2006.

The CGP is afraid of the amount of water the ethanol plant will suck from the surrounding area, a fear that is eerily similar to Spaceballs, although, to be fair, Spaceball One was after oxygen — not water. Besides the fear of water shortages in their personal wells, Webster County residents are also resistant to the amount of pollution the plant would create, making any remaining water unusable.

Does Missouri really need more ethanol right now? I won’t go into the details that have been outlined many times before, but ethanol is not the key for Missouri’s energy. Already, we are too bogged down by it with our E-10 ethanol mandate. The new plant will not only hit residents economically with increased fuel and food costs, but will also literally have their life source cut off.

Be sure to read the Show-Me Institute’s case study, “The Economic Impact of The Missouri E-10 Ethanol Mandate.”

Expect Road Delays

Posted on September 10, 2008May 5, 2026 by Calvin Harris II

I apologize, Missourians. There will be road delays in the near future, and I’m not talking about traffic. According to an article in the Joplin Globe, the Federal Highway Trust Fund is running short on money, thus delaying or even canceling road/bridge projects in Missouri. The U.S. Secretary of Transportation has asked Congress for an $8 billion increase in funding for the Federal Highway Trust Fund, to assist with financing highway projects. If Congress can not accumulate the funds, Missouri could lose $252 million, translating to 8,770 jobs. Wow — as if our economy hasn’t already taken a hit.

This blow to our economy is something that I cannot take lightly. According to Scott Bachman, planner for MoDOT Joplin’s regional office:

“We’re hoping Congress will come up with a short-term solution, now that it’s back from the August recess. In the meantime, we’ll watch how much revenue comes into the highway trust fund and how much they pay out in ratio to the funding coming in.”

I’m sorry, but I do not want to wait in traffic and put the fate of our state’s roads in the hands of Congress. This would be a great opportunity for Missourians to flex our muscles and take the situation into our own hands. Tolling and private financing could be major options.

During one of my first weeks here in the Show-Me Institute office, one of our policy analysts (I will give you a hint) asked whether I knew the only tolled transportation facility in Missouri? Clearly, I did not know the answer. To my surprise, it was the Lake of the Ozarks Community Bridge, built in 1998. This is the only one. As a graduate student at Brandeis University (located in Waltham, Mass.), I am lucky to pass only two toll facilities (versus four or five) just to get into Boston! I really think we should keep our options open to public-private partnerships. Either that, or wait for Congress to find that pot of gold under the rainbow.

STL Crime Rate Up While Cops Pay for Health Care Choice

Posted on September 10, 2008May 5, 2026 by Jacob Voss

On the same morning that the St. Louis Police Board announced that crime rates were up in St. Louis for the first time in 20 months, the board also announced the force’s new health insurance plan. Officers now get a choice between a free plan with an attached co-pay, or the plan they already have for $20 per pay period. The Post-Dispatch discusses the board meeting in detail.

The new plan is a step forward for the STLPD, giving officers a choice in how to protect themselves from future harm — but the cost increase is quite dramatic. While the increased costs cannot be offset by wage cuts, as elementary economic theory would suggest, the police force could delay any future pay increases. Also, increased costs delay the chance of overtime pay for police officers even more.

Typically, increased health costs would cause the demand to work in a particular position to fall, but recruitment has always been strong with the police force. One worry arising from increased job costs would be retention. At what point do the benefits of working as a cop in St. Louis city no longer outweigh the benefits of being a cop in St. Louis County? Rather than dealing with the dangers of inner-city pressure, they could be giving me another speeding ticket on Shrewsbury. Why should experienced police officers stay in a jurisdiction with not only a higher level of danger, but higher health care costs as well, when there is always a rookie cop ready to replace them?

With setting up health savings accounts (HSAs), the STLPD is in an odd position. Because of the nature of the job, all police officers will be in harm’s way on a daily basis. The usual solution — moving out of harm’s way — isn’t an option for the fuzz, so premiums for cops are naturally going to be higher than, say, premiums for a butcher or pharmacist. Though the move toward free-market health care might be an awkward one for the St. Louis Police Department, any cost increases will be offset by the value of freedom of choice.

The Show-Me Institute’s vice president, Jason Hannasch, writes about the benefits of HSAs here.

Keeping Tabs on Kids

Posted on September 10, 2008May 5, 2026 by Sarah Brodsky

It’s striking how many education reforms are gaining ground in the other cities while being completely ignored in Missouri. One such experiment is paying kids to do well on tests. (Education Next reports that it works.) This past week the L.A. Times published a story about another innovation: technologies that allow parents to track their children’s activities at school. Here are a few possible uses:

Increasingly common Web programs let parents track lunch-money spending, schoolwork habits and tardiness.

“There’s this black box — a child goes away and comes home, what happened during this time?” said Shelley Pasnik, director of the nonprofit Center for Children and Technology in New York. “Now, new information and communications technology allows for the mystery of what transpires on any given day to unravel.”

Public schools in Los Angeles will give parents access to school lunch data starting in 2009.

This technology should a boon for districts that want parental involvement. Parents will be able to stay up to date, and all the “have your parents sign and bring back to school” sheets of paper will get to stay in a forest somewhere. As for the concern that this will put too much pressure on kids, asking them to spend their lunch money on lunch and then show up for class doesn’t sound like an exorbitantly high expectation. If you want to see kids who are really under pressure, watch the Chinese and Indian kids in 2 Million Minutes.

It’s Official Language Season Again

Posted on September 10, 2008May 5, 2026 by Sarah Brodsky

An article in the Kansas City Star reports on the recurring official language proposal that we can’t seem to get rid of. Voters will decide this November whether to tack an amendment onto the Missouri Constitution making English the language of “official proceedings.”

The article quotes a Somali refugee who wants to learn English, but who is not yet fluent. This man’s story highlights how ineffective the amendment would be. Here you have someone who really wants to speak the language of the country where he lives. He’s already motivated by his own desire to learn. He doesn’t need a law or the state constitution to tell him what he wants, and no legal change will ease his struggle to master English.

Besides, neither he nor any other non-English-speakers conduct official proceedings in our state. Those proceedings are now conducted, as they always have been, in English.

Several states have adopted similar amendments without ill effects; it doesn’t help, but it can’t hurt, either, right? The problem is, cluttering up the state constitution with a few meaningless amendments opens the door to a whole herd of other meaningless amendments. Missouri has official invertebrates, desserts, and everything in between. Do we want all that official stuff in the constitution, too?

Close Call for Missouri’s Renewable Energy

Posted on September 9, 2008May 5, 2026 by Jacob Voss

An article from today’s Kansas City Star details the close call faced by the group Missourians for Cleaner and Cheaper Energy (aren’t we all), when its proposed “Clean Energy Initiative” was nearly skipped over for the upcoming election. It was almost taken off the November ballot because the Secretary of State had rejected too many petition signatures. Luckily for the concerned group, a Missouri judge agreed with them and ruled that the initiative would be placed back on the ballot.

After spending a summer working for the city of St. Louis Board of Election Commissioners, it is no surprise that a petition could be rejected in the final moments of its processing. Petitions are mostly signed on the street by people in a hurry, so legibility is not their first concern. My handwriting isn’t glorious, of course, but wow — some people’s signatures would have pharmacists scratching their heads. Plus, there is always the percentage of jokers out there who think it’s hilarious to put down fake information. Frankly, I think the odds are very slim that anyone named “McLovin” are in favor of any petition being placed on a ballot.

The Clean Energy Initiative was not the only petition blocked by the Secretary of State for lack of valid signatures. Two petitions dealing with eminent domain abuse were also dropped. To gain a place on the ballot, a petition must have at least as many signatures as 5 percent of the number of votes in the last gubernatorial election, from at least six of the nine congressional districts in Missouri.

This news comes in the same week that Ameren proposed a 12-percent increase in its rates. With today’s energy costs, Missourians need to be aware of any options they have when it comes to their energy sources, and have the opportunity to voice their opinions.

When expressing those opinions, Missourians should make sure to write neatly.

Show-Me Institute Releases 2007 Annual Report

Posted on September 9, 2008May 5, 2026 by Show-Me Institute Staff

The Show-Me Institute today released its 2007 annual report, providing a thorough summary of the institute’s many policy victories and research accomplishments during its second full year of operations. Here’s an excerpt from the introduction by R. Crosby Kemper III, the institute’s chairman, and Rex Sinquefield, the institute’s president:

Our second full year of operations was a time of both tremendous growth and phenomenal success. We haven’t won every battle, but that doesn’t mean we’ll stop fighting — or even slow down. Missourians deserve to have their tax dollars spent wisely, and the work of the Show-Me Institute is an instrumental part of making that happen. We want to make the best in policy research readily available to everybody who cares about the future of the state. As we lay the economic groundwork for an honest and accurate analysis of Missouri policy, we’re putting valuable tools of knowledge and insight into the hands of those who want to work toward a more prosperous future. We invite you to help us make 2008 even better.

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.

In the meantime, though, take a few minutes to read about the dizzying variety of things we accomplished during 2007. I know the board and staff share my own sense of pride and satisfaction in the work we’re doing. Slowly but surely, we’re helping to make Missouri a better place for everyone.

Skiers Will Be Punished for Out-of-Control Zoning

Posted on September 9, 2008May 5, 2026 by David Stokes

Now, here is an issue I am uniquely qualified to write about. It involves my primary area of study (local government), an issue (zoning) that we regularly debate around the Show-Me Institute, and pretty much my favorite thing to do: skiing. And, yes, I’ve have been to Hidden Valley plenty of times, although not in the past few years.

Wildwood, with its 16 (why?) councilmembers, is regulating Hidden Valley out of business. I know this will come as a shock to some people in government who think you can just take and take and take, but sometimes businesses and citizens can’t take it any more and they leave. Much like the citizens in Chesterfield who complain about the noise from Spirit airport, citizens who almost assuredly moved to Wildwood after Hidden Valley opened are now complaining about it. Complaining is one thing, but shutting it down through nuisance regulations is another. From the article in the Post-Dispatch, I present you the picture of local zoning run amuck (my comments in italics):

Boyd said he learned last week, at a meeting of the Planing and Zoning Commission, that he may be required to pay a nearly $252,000 fee to build the proposed parking lot.

$252 K for a parking lot. Amazing, but not surprising.

The city also was requiring that Hidden Valley get its permission to stay open past 11 p.m.

Liquor is not involved here, as I understand it, so there is no reason to enforce this, other then neighbors’ complaints about something that predated their arrival.

Woerther said Boyd had several ways to get around the $252,000 fee, such as offering up a few of the resort’s acres for public space.

Beautiful. If you just give us some of your property, we will waive the fee. The owner is right to call this blackmail.

I understand that conflicts occur as areas change — from farmland to suburbs, from slums to gentrified lofts, from nature to business parks. This is why you grandfather things in, so that property owners who ride out the changes do not get punished. You also need local officials with a modicum of common sense. Wildwood officials do not appear to have any of that, which is why they are losing a great business, a great asset, and a large property taxpayer. But, most of all, I hope they are happy that the local disabled skiers association no longer has a place to ski. Job well done, Wildwood.

Why We Need to Tighten the Initiative Petition Process

Posted on September 9, 2008May 5, 2026 by David Stokes

The Kansas City Star has a write-up on a perfect example of why Missouri needs to tighten up the requirements for initiative petitions to amend the constitution. By “tighten up,” I mean “make more difficult.” Missourians will now get to vote on whether or not our utilities will be forced by constitutional law to use more renewable energy in the future. This is a decision that should not be made by voters. It should be made by the utilities, the regulatory agencies that oversee them, and elected officials on the appropriate committees that can study this complicated issue. The idea that voters — the vast majority of whom will have absolutely no idea what the economic implications (good and bad) of this petition are — will make this decision is absurd.

I write this while giving the benefit of the doubt to the people who prepared it and assuming they have at least some idea of what they are talking about. As the 2006 Kansas City light rail initiative petition demonstrated, though, you can’t necessarily make that assumption. Here is one atrocious example:

[The petition] also would limit rate increases associated with moving to renewable energy resources to 1 percent.

So, we are going to mandate all sorts of changes to the companies, but now allow them to pass those costs on to customers. I can’t see anything bad coming from this. No potential for reduced investment in other areas (like nuclear), or reduced wages for employees, or reduced returns to shareholders (such as Joe Sixpack’s IRA), to make up for this legally mandated loss. The idea that you can just force a company to absorb costs and assume there will not be negative consequences is idiocy.

To the defenders of the petition process, I know that the legislature also makes a lot of stupid laws. But, at least in theory, those stupid laws are also changeable — i.e., the village law. These petitions amend our constitution, making it difficult to alter decisions on an issue such as this where the people making this complicated decision will have no idea what they are purporting to do, beyond a feel-good move to renewable energy.

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.