Unfortunately, the report only ranks the top 10 states, but New Mexico is nowhere to be found in any of the sub-rankings leading me to believe that we’re towards the bottom.
When will NM get in the game?
The following is from Common Sense with Paul Jacob. Given that New Mexico Sen. Tom Udall is the lead sponsor of this amendment to undermine the First Amendment, I felt it was worth posting in its entirety:
Yesterday’s somber thirteenth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks was marred by a brand new and savage act of violence against the very essence of America: the First Amendment.
Who orchestrated the attack? Responsibility was not claimed by ISIL or ISIS . . . or North Korea’s Kim Jong-un . . . or even Dennis Rodman.
The culprits? A majority of the United States Senate.
Fifty-four Democrats voted to scratch out the words “freedom of speech” from the First Amendment to be replaced by giving Congress new power to regulate the spending, and thereby the speech, in their own re-election campaigns.
Conflict of interest, s’il vous plaît?
The assault was only thwarted because a simple majority falls short of the two-thirds required to send the constitutional amendment to the House.
Dubbed the “Democracy for All Amendment,” supporters and their many cheerleaders in the media pretended Senate Joint Resolution 19 would overturn the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision and get big money out of politics. Certainly an amendment could do that, explicitly, but this one would have done no such thing.
Instead, SJR 19 would have empowered our despised Congress to regulate as it pleased, with such sweeping power that the amendment’s authors felt the need to reassure supporters (such as the New York Times) by stating in the amendment that, “Nothing in this article shall be construed to grant Congress or the States the power to abridge the freedom of the press.”
Let’s hope that, for the 54 Senators who voted to repeal freedom of speech, this goes down as a suicide attack . . . politically.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
My own article on Udall’s assault on the First Amendment can be found here.
The New Mexico Freedom Hour is presented by the Rio Grande Foundation. It next airs on Saturday, September 12, 2014 from 12pm to 1pm on 770 KKOB AM. This week we’ll take on two important subjects relating to New Mexico’s economy:
• In the first half hour, host Paul Gessing will talk about New Mexico’s underfunded government employee pension system which was found to be the most underfunded system among any of the 50 states according to a new report by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI). We’ll discuss the report, what makes New Mexico’s pension system so dire, and what needs to remedy the problem with Aloysius Hogan, a Senior Fellow with CEI.
• In the second half hour, Gessing will interview site selection expert John Boyd about the Tesla decision, why he thinks Tesla chose Nevada over New Mexico, and what New Mexico should consider doing to make it more attractive as a business destination in the future.
Listeners are encouraged not only to tune in and listen, but to call in with questions: 505-243-3333.
You can usually count on the Journal’s Winthrop Quigley to provide the left-leaning viewpoint when it comes to the New Mexico economy and education system. His recent “Upfront” column on the liberals’ desires to tap (raid) New Mexico’s permanent fund to support a variety of early childhood programs including pre k is no different.
Interestingly, while proponents of massive new taxpayer expenditures on early childhood learning love to claim that their programs are “proven effective,” the real-world reality is far different. For starters, there is the federal Head Start program which the government’s own accountability office found to have “no lasting impact by 1st grade.”
The effectiveness of real-world pre k programs at the state level is questionable at best as the charts below illustrate (Oklahoma and Georgia have two of the longest-running universal pre k programs.
And, as if all that is not enough, the US Chamber of Commerce just today released its “Leaders and Laggards” report. New Mexico’s overall performance was certainly poor, but its “return on investment” was graded “F.” It would seem that policymakers might want to get the current education system to something resembling effectiveness before spending hundreds-of-millions more annually.
If you haven’t already read it, Robert Bryce had an excellent article in today’s Albuquerque Journal on the continued growth in the use of hydrocarbon-based fuels (and how that growth has outpaced so-called “renewables”) even while taxpayer-subsidized wind and solar have grown rapidly in recent years.
The good news for those of you in New Mexico is that Bryce will be speaking on December 9, 2014 at Rio Grande Foundation events in Albuquerque and Farmington. We are three months out from that event and will be providing more details as the date grows closer, but with Bryce’s piece appearing in the local paper, it only makes sense to alert our readers that he’ll be coming to New Mexico soon. See Bryce’s article below:
Solar energy appears to finally be coming of age
In July, Bloomberg New Energy Finance declared that we are in the midst of a “solar revolution” and the firm predicted that solar will be the fastest-growing form of global generation capacity through 2030. A few days after that report was released, Deutsche Bank announced plans to lend $1 billion to support solar deployment in Japan.
About 400,000 U.S. homes now have solar panels on their roofs. One of those homes is the White House. Last year, after a 27-year sabbatical, solar panels were installed on the roof of America’s most famous house.
There’s no question that solar is on a tear. Since 2011, the amount of energy produced by the solar sector has more than doubled. But amidst the solar frenzy, we must remember the critical issue of scale. Indeed, despite solar’s rapid growth, its output is still being dwarfed by the ongoing growth in hydrocarbons.
That fact can easily be proven by comparing the surge in solar-energy production with the remarkable growth in domestic oil output. In July, according to the Energy Information Administration, U.S. oil production averaged about 8.5 million barrels per day. That’s a 16 percent increase over July 2013 figures, when domestic crude output was about 7.3 million barrels per day.
Thus, over the past 12 months or so – thanks largely to horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing in shale formations – U.S. oil production has increased by 1.2 million barrels per day. How does that compare with solar?
In 2013, according to the BP Statistical Review of World Energy, the energy output of the global solar sector amounted to about 600,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day. Thus, in one year, merely the increase in U.S. oil production has been roughly equal to twice the contribution from every solar-energy installation on the planet.
The scale issue becomes even more obvious when comparing solar with coal. In 2013, global coal use increased by 3 percent. But in absolute terms, that small percentage increase amounted to 2 million barrels of oil equivalent per day. Thus, in one year, global coal use grew by more than three times the contribution now being made by all global solar. Indeed, solar’s contribution is downright Lilliputian when compared with coal consumption, which now totals about 77 million barrels of oil equivalent per day, or roughly 128 times the amount of energy being produced by solar.
Let me be clear: I’m bullish on solar. I’ve invested in solar. I have 3,200 watts of solar panels on the roof of my house. (Why did I install them? Simple: Austin’s city-owned utility paid two-thirds of the cost.)
Prices for solar systems like mine are falling. In 1980, the average cost of a solar photovoltaic module was over $20 per watt. Today, the cost is well under $1 per watt. If cheaper solar systems can be twinned with cheaper electricity-storage devices, we will see a transformation of electric grids around the world. Furthermore, solar will grow quickly in rural areas and island economies, where even relatively small batteries can make a big difference for electricity-starved populations.
That said, the hard reality is that for all of its rapid growth, solar isn’t even keeping pace with the growth in the global appetite for hydrocarbons. And here’s another truth: while civilians and politicians alike eagerly tout the advances being made in renewable energy, they routinely fail to appreciate how ongoing innovation in the oil and gas sector – in everything from better seismic techniques to digitally controlled drill bits – has resulted in faster and cheaper drilling, which, in turn, has turbocharged the growth in hydrocarbon production.
So by all means, let’s appreciate the growth in solar. And if it makes you happy – and/or you can get a subsidy – put some solar panels on your roof. But don’t count hydrocarbons out yet. They’re going to stick around for many decades to come.
RGF president Paul Gessing recently appeared on the public affairs show of KNAT TV. There are two separate interviews, one on New Mexico’s economic situation and the need for a right to work law, the next on Gov. Martinez’s efforts to re-impose work/education/volunteering requirements for food stamp recipients. Total interview time for the combined interviews is 30 minutes:
The video of last night’s “Duel in the Desert” debate between myself and former gubernatorial candidate Alan Webber is now up:
In case you missed it, we also had “dueling” opinion pieces that are now posted at NM Policy Debate.
While the crowd was definitely, pro-Webber, no matter which side of the debate you fall on, the New Mexico economy is the single most important issue facing our state. I was gratified to see hundreds of people show up to hear a discussion of the issues. It was a great opportunity to present the Rio Grande Foundation’s vision of a more economically-free New Mexico to a new group. Definitely not “preaching to the choir.”
Tonight, from 6 to 7:30pm, Gessing and Webber will debate these and other economic issues facing New Mexico. Come out and be part of the action!
I’ve been to the Big Apple, San Francisco, and Chicago. All of them are great places to visit, but they are also really expensive places to live with high regulatory and tax burdens.
But what about more affordable cities that still have things to do, but won’t break the bank…you know, the category that Albuquerque or Las Cruces might fit in one day. Well, the folks at Kiplinger have put together one such list and, not surprisingly, all nine of their selections are in right to work states. Perhaps also not surprisingly, four of the nine are in Texas which has no income tax.
Unions and some on the left like to unfairly paint right to work laws as “right to work for less.” What they prefer to gloss over is the very real fact that the cost of living is generally cheaper in right to work states as well.
New Mexico’s subsidies were specifically-mentioned in the show with a special nod to plans to throw money at the television show “The Bachelor” in hopes of bringing the show to Santa Fe.
Interesting story from KOB-TV on Right to Work:
Obviously, if you go ask a bunch of union people about Right to Work, your responses are going to be rather negative, but according to new polling from Gallup, 65% of Democrats nationwide support the concept.
We’re gaining momentum.
I posted last week that California’s Legislature had achieved temporary sanity by rejecting a statewide ban on plastic grocery bags. Unfortunately, but unsurprisingly, that sanity wore off and it looks like Gov. Jerry Brown will be signing the ban into law soon.
Think this type of ban won’t spread elsewhere? Santa Fe and Silver City already have bans in place. I’ve also talked to at least one elected local official who plans to introduce a local ban. Want more information on plastic bag bans? We’ve got free public events coming soon (on the evening of Monday, September 15 and the morning of Tuesday, September 16, in Las Cruces and Albuquerque.
I recently sat down with Jamai Haquani of the Albuquerque-area public access show Local, National, Global to discuss New Mexico’s struggling economy and what can be done about it. See part 1 of the interview below:
Following closely on the heels of our recent release of polling data on the potential for a “right to work” law in New Mexico (the poll found 85% support the concept of “right to work”), the Gallup polling organization has done some additional polling on issues surrounding unions and “right to work” laws.
For starters, according to the Gallup article, “82% of Americans agree that ‘no American should be required to join any private organization, like a labor union, against his will.'” That closely tracks our results.
When asked about “right to work” in a slightly different way, support for such laws remains strong at 71 percent approval:
Where things get really interesting is that despite overwhelming support for “right to work” laws, most Americans support unions:
This attitude flies directly in the face of anti- “right to work” union critics who try to conflate such laws with being “anti-union.” That could not be further from the truth and majorities of Americans seem to support unions themselves while also believing that workers should not be coerced into joining them or paying dues to them.
This puts RGF in-sync with most Americans although to be fair, we side with FDR in opposing government labor unions, but respect private sector unionism as long as they can’t coerce membership or payment of dues.
Oh, and one last kicker from Gallup. 65% of Democrats and more independents than Republicans (I guess those independents really support not being coerced to join anyone whether that be unions or political parties) support “right to work.”
I don’t read Joe Monahan’s blog (unless someone directly tells me to) so I just ran across his not-so-thinly-veiled attack today on yours truly and the Rio Grande Foundation. Monahan claims that New Mexico is suffering from “austerity” as advocated by the Rio Grande Foundation (technically, he refuses to mention us and instead calls us a “right wing think tank”).
For starters, New Mexico’s spending has grown in real terms under Gov. Martinez. According to the LFC, Martinez’ first General Fund budget was $5.43 billion and it is now $6.16 billion. That averages out to about 3.58 percent growth on an annual basis. Given low statistically-low inflation rates and New Mexico’s barely-there population growth, New Mexico’s budget has grown every year (on average) under Martinez.
Monahan moves on to attack our advocacy and research on a right to work law for New Mexico, but rather than doing so, he makes the bizarre claim: “Remember, a couple of years ago when the mantra was cutting corporate taxes and economic paradise would result?” No, I don’t remember that. RGF detailed the benefits of previous, not-enacted bill reducing corporate income tax rates, but we were never asked to testify on the bill that passed with its potential tax hikes and expansion of the film program . More importantly, Martinez’ small corporate income tax cuts are not even half-implemented yet.
What Monahan and his ilk refuse to acknowledge is that states that have right to work laws consistently outperform non-right to work states. The most recent data available show 8 of the 10 fastest-growing states have such laws on the books.
Recently, the Santa Fe Reporter ran an article decrying the US Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision from a highly-typical left-wing viewpoint that can be summarized from a line in the article: “Whether it’s restricting access to abortion or restricting access to birth control, women’s autonomy as individual human beings capable of making decisions is apparently not valued by the majority of those sitting on our nation’s highest court.”
While the left loves to pin blame on sexism or some other nefarious plot, the real issue is the absurd US health care laws (laws that long-predated ObamaCare) that strongly incentivize employers to purchase health care for their workers. You can read my letter to the editor which was published in response (and another letter supporting the decision! here).
As with so many liberal critiques of the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision, Hunter Riley fails to address the central issues in the case. Instead, she prefers to play up the “War on Women” meme and rail against the court’s supposedly sexist views.
The central issue in Hobby Lobby is the federal tax preference for employer health care purchases relative to those made by individuals. Absent this provision, which was literally an accident of history dating back to World War II wage and price controls, employers would have literally no say in their workers’ health care decisions.
Unfortunately, the Obamacare health “reforms” failed to address this simple, misguided provision, which created a number of harmful consequences, most notably the dominance of insurance companies in American health care.
The court simply decided that certain businesses had an interest in not purchasing for their employees certain forms of birth control that they believed to cause an abortion. Sixteen of 20 approved forms of birth control remain covered, and there is nothing stopping workers from purchasing these products on their own.
Ultimately, the reproductive rights community should get over their misguided obsession with “free” health care and work with libertarians to end misguided policies that place employers and government bureaucrats in control of our most intimate medical decisions.
Paul J Gessing
President Rio Grande Foundation
The first episode of the New Mexico Freedom Hour on 770 KKOB is now posted. At the outset of the show I outlined a few of the issues likely to be discussed during the show and our goals for the show. I spent most of the rest of the show discussing right to work laws with Jarrett Skorup of the Michigan-based Mackinac Center. Michigan is the latest state to have adopted such a law.
You can listen to the podcast here.
California is known for its frequent experiments with bad economic policies, but it has seemingly avoided enacting the first statewide ban on plastic grocery bags, at least for now.
Such bans are by no means limited to California. In fact, Santa Fe and Silver City, New Mexico have adopted bans. In an effort to educate New Mexico policymakers and average citizens on the potential drawbacks of these restrictive policies, the Rio Grande Foundation is hosting a series of free public forums on the issue of plastic bag bans on September 15 in Albuquerque and on September 16 in Las Cruces.
The past sometimes looks better than it really was. That seems to be the case with some conservatives and the administration of George W. Bush. As I note in response to a column defending the Bush track record by economist Micha Gisser, spending and government grew at rapid rates during the Bush years.
I respect Micha Gisser as an economist, but I think he allows politics to cloud his economic thinking in his recent column on the US and New Mexico economies.
In analyzing the national economy, Gisser, emphasizes the Bush tax cuts, but fails to acknowledge that the Administration’s overall economic track record was disastrous (from a free market perspective). To name just a few harmful policies, Bush (along with a Republican controlled Congress) increased spending and indebtedness to unprecedented levels, created a new health care entitlement, and dramatically expanded the scope and cost of federal regulations. Obama has raised taxes and further expanded government.
New Mexico’s recent economic history is also nuanced. Democrats have consistently controlled the Legislature for decades, but Bill Richardson managed to convince them to reduce income tax rates from 8.2 to 4.9 percent. These were the most significant pro-growth tax cuts enacted in any state in that time frame. Not surprisingly, New Mexico led the region in personal income growth during the decade from 2000 to 2009.
Unfortunately, Richardson also created the costly Rail Runner and Spaceport, both of which continue to burden our economy. Gov. Martinez has worked to reduce the corporate tax and gross receipts tax burdens while not burdening taxpayers with new, costly projects like the Rail Runner and Spaceport.
Both New Mexico and the US economies face serious problems with out-of-control spending, tax burdens on productive behavior, and costly regulations. We should analyze politicians’ records on their merits, absent partisan blinders.
Paul J. Gessing
Rio Grande Foundation
PO Box 40336
Albuquerque, NM 87196