Taxing for Better Roads!

Posted on by Maurice Harris

In today’s Columbia Missourian, an article discusses the problems that the Missouri Legislature is having in finding an appropriate amount to tax to improve transportation infrastructure in Missouri. Both the House and the Senate transportation chairman, Neal St. Onge and Bill Stouffer respectively, want to raise the sales tax by either 1/2 cent or 1 cent to improve roads in Missouri. Yet both sides are far from agreeing on many of the details of the new tax, which they want to send to the voters by the August 2008 election:

The chairmen of the House and Senate transportation committees have
proposed their own transportation tax packages with hopes of putting
them on the August 2008 ballot. But both said Monday that prospects for
legislative approval appear iffy and a better route may be an
initiative petition by citizens.

Overall, the voters of Missouri will have to decide on any tax increase for future projects, but I believe the better option to this problem of funding transportation construction is coming from Sen. Matt Bartle:

Separately, Sen. Matt Bartle, R-Lee’s Summit, has proposed a
constitutional amendment allowing the Missouri Department of
Transportation to operate toll roads.

Instead of raising taxes on people who may almost never use highways for long distance travel, put in tolls for people who always use the highways. It’s a fairer way to collect money for roads and will cost taxpayers nothing — but the government will still receive the money they need to expand our transportation infrastructure in Missouri.

How Old is Old Enough?

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

A letter to the editor in the Columbia Daily Tribune suggests that we should allow people to serve as state legislators only if they are at least 40 years old:

Anyone younger probably does not have the life experience, job experience or kids they’ve put through college needed to fully comprehend legislative repercussions.

First, most 40-year-olds haven’t put kids through college either — unless they had kids at age 18. And what if a legislator doesn’t have kids, or his kids decided to work after high school? Does that mean he isn’t fit to serve?

What we really need is legislators who have common sense. Someone who didn’t have this quality at age 25 or 35 is unlikely to gain it suddenly when he turns 40.

If at First You Don’t Succeed …

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

D. Kent King, the state’s Commissioner of Education, says "no" to the St. Louis Public Schools’ appeal of the state takeover:

"Based on the information submitted, I find you have presented no new or corrected information," King said in a written denial sent to Superintendent Diana Bourisaw.

The district will keep trying in court tomorrow. I give the St. Louis Public Schools an ‘A’ for effort. Had they worked as hard to improve student academic achievement as they’re working to hold on to their jobs, the district would probably be in much better shape now.

When Government is Unaccountable

Posted on by Maurice Harris

In today’s SE Missourian, an article discusses the sorry financial state that Puxico, MO, is in. The state auditor found that the town uses restricted funds that supposed to be spent on streets and the water went to the general fund of the town. Also, the audit found excess spending for items that Puxico did not need:

The city also used approximately $1,400 of taxpayer money to purchase
hams for Christmas presents for employees and for a Christmas party, as
well as purchasing flowers, figurines and candy for city employees or
other individuals for illness or death, and paid for an official’s
spouse to attend a conference.

The article also discusses that the town was missing money as well, causing budget deficits that grew over the last few years. Finally, the town broke sunshine laws that kept citizens ill-informed of what was going on:

"The city does not document when agendas for board meetings are
posted," said Lewis. There was no information available to determine
when the agendas were posted.

This is proof positive that when government is not overseen by the people it serves, incidents like this happen, where government waste runs rampant. Also, Puxico’s economy is not in the best shape to expand the tax base and add revenue to the town’s treasury. This is probably due to the sorry fiscal shape of the town. Overall, it shows that when governments are not kept in check, making sure that their tax dollars are well-spent, waste and malfeasance can happen.

Reliability Engineering for Property Rights

Posted on by Eric D. Dixon

On May 24, the Springfield News-Leader published an editorial about eminent domain, highlighting the fact that Ozark, a town outlying Springfield to the south, ended up electing a new mayor because of the city’s use of eminent domain threats to buy up homes for private development. It’s a heartwarming tale of citizen action standing up against abuse of power by government officials — but the News-Leader drew the wrong lesson. The editorial claims that because, in this case, local activism led to a change in policy, constitutional protection against eminent domain is not required. If officials abuse eminent domain, citizens will respond through electoral pressure, which is "how democracy works best." So why try to stave off that abuse beforehand, through constitutional law?

On Saturday, the News-Leader printed a response op-ed by Ron Calzone, chairman of Missouri Citizens for Property Rights, who handily dismantles the newspaper’s earlier arguments:

It was no small thing for citizens of Ozark to throw out an incumbent mayor in favor of a candidate who was pro-property rights. And a circuit court in Arnold, Mo., declaring unconstitutional the use of eminent domain for private redevelopment by non-chartered cities, was the most significant advancement for property rights in decades.

These victories were fought for and won on the local level, but that is no indication that the state should abdicate its responsibility to protect its citizens’ rights. Imagine if we made the same application to other types of crime. A homeowner thwarts a burglar with his 12 gauge shotgun. A little old lady’s screams scare off a purse snatcher. A mugger picks the wrong victim when he preys on the martial arts instructor. These are all "local" successes, but they do not mitigate the need for an able police force.

In fact, the very purpose of government is to protect its citizen’s property — both their material property and also what James Madison referred to as that encompassed by the "larger and juster meaning" of "property". Our own state constitution is based on this principle.

I’m reminded of the time I attended the Foundation for Economic Education‘s Las Vegas conference in 2002. On my final day in town, I caught Penn & Teller‘s magic show and saw them perform their version of the infamous bullet catch illusion. Penn Jillette assured the audience (he did the assuring, since Teller doesn’t speak onstage) that the trick was completely safe — they had several layers of redundant safety precautions built in to the routine. If any one, or even two, of those precautions failed during the actual performance, the others would still prevent either magician from coming to harm.

This is also known as reliability engineering. The idea is, you don’t want a critical system to have any single point of failure that can jeopardize the entire operation when only one thing goes wrong. If, like Penn & Teller, you build redundant safety mechanisms into your system, you’ll be much less likely to succumb to a crisis if any one part of the system fails.

What Calzone is arguing for here is a reliable system for protection against eminent domain. Sure, citizens can organize at local levels to protect themselves, but let’s face it — everybody has their own lives to lead, and fighting city hall isn’t high on most people’s priority lists. If there were a safety point at the constitutional level as well, abuses would be far less likely to require local activism in the first place. Redundancy at multiple levels would protect more people from unjust property takings.

A Doctor Comments on Midwives

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

In the Southeast Missourian, Dr. Eric G. Morton describes his concerns with the midwife legislation:

This bill is not about freedom. It is about looking at a small special-interest group that wants to practice medicine without a license or malpractice insurance.

Dr. Morton responds to midwives and their supporters who were quoted in the paper as saying that it’s hard to get to know doctors and that midwives are more caring. He assures readers that he is in fact quite caring; he calls women by their first names, shakes hands with them, etc. He writes:

I believe most physicians are compassionate and caring and provide an adequate birth experience. They get to know their patients on a personal level.

I’m sure he’s right that most physicians are just as caring as midwives. But that’s not the point of the midwife legislation. Women should be free to choose a midwife instead of a physician, even if any "objective" third party would consider the physician to be ten times as caring and knowledgable. The patient is the one who ultimately needs to be satisfied with the quality of her medical care, so she should make the decision.

Somebody is seeing the light …

Posted on by David Stokes

Tucked into an article about plans to turn part of the Gateway Mall into a sculpture garden is a very interesting quote from Alderwoman Phyllis Young, who represents Soulard and downtown. The plan is awesome, by the way, but that is not the purpose of this post. This quote is:

Young, whose ward includes the mall, said she hopes the pact will set a precedent for private agencies to help run city parks, while still offering public uses.

Sounds like a public-private partnership to me! Much more to come on this issue (PPPs, not the sculpture park, although I hope that succeeds, too) in the future from SMI.

A Bad Idea for Missouri HealthNet

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

Here’s a bad idea that didn’t make it into the Missouri HealthNet bill — a "rewards debit card":

The idea was to give recipients rewards for healthy choices that could be used to purchase additional services. Shields points out that while the idea didn’t make it into the bill, it isn’t dead. He says the Department of Social Services could still consider the idea when it works on the details of MO Health Net.

If this debit card becomes part of the program, it will result in a lot of waste. First, most healthy choices are not easily monitered. How will the state know if someone chooses to exercise more or doesn’t smoke cigarettes? The debit card would encourage people to use more of the easily monitored services, such as exams or medical tests, in order to get rewards. That wouldn’t necessarily make anyone healthier, and it could eliminate the efficiency gains some people anticipate from the program.

Second, what’s healthy for one person might not be healthy for someone else. And there’s a lot of disagreement about which choices are ever healthy, as is evidenced by the proliferation of diets and exercise plans. Some people might just throw up their hands and conclude that everything is healthy. For example, you can find the American Heart Association seal on just about any food at a grocery store other than potato chips.

It’s a better idea to let people make their own choices, without rewards or punishments from the state. If people are responsible for some routine health care costs, such as through a health savings account, they’ll have an incentive to make the choices that are healthy for them.

Immigrants Want to Learn English

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

KOMU reports on kids who are trying to learn English in Columbia, Missouri:

"He spends an hour a day in the ELL class, while that’s usually enough time, but because there are too many students in the class we feel he doesn’t have enough opportunities to speak up," Yun says.

Most parents, like the Kims, hire tutors to give their children extra speaking time, but communicating is just part of the challenge.

This is why we don’t need an English-language amendment to the state Constitution. Even short-term visitors want their kids to learn English. Foreign-born parents who are here to stay are even more adamant about the importance of English. The Pew Hispanic Center has found that 96 percent of foreign-born Hispanics consider "the goal of teaching English to the children of immigrant families" to be very important.

Immigrants aren’t trying to get the state to conduct business in foreign languages. They view interaction with Americans as a valuable opportunity to learn English.

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