In an op-ed in today’s Projo, Froma Harrop invokes the name of Milton Friedman in arguing for drug legalization…
I was alone on a New York subway platform, when a man started toward me. His glassy eyes foretold what was to happen. He pointed at the flute case I was carrying and said, “Give it to me”….Alas, by the end of the column, any implied endorsement that market-based principles have a serious place in the formulation of government policy as more than a dash of rhetorical window dressing is entirely lost…
I didn’t need Milton Friedman, a Nobel laureate who died on Nov. 16, to explain the economics involved. My mugger obviously had a drug habit made very expensive by the fact that his narcotic was illegal. Were his drug legal, he might have been able to buy it for the price of celery, in which case he wouldn’t have needed me. He could have found the required change under seat cushions.
As a pure economic transaction, the mugging was most inefficient…
Try this instead: Put the drug dealers and narco-terrorists out of business by providing free drugs to our addicted populations. That way, we know who the abusers are and can offer them treatment. And those who persist in their addiction wouldn’t have to prey on the rest of us for drug money.It’s safe to say that government subsidies for narcotics would not be consistent with the views championed by Professor Friedman.
Still, this is progress of a sort. Maybe we can look forward to some future Froma Harrop columns where she will be supporting market-based ideas in education reform, health care reform, and retirement income reform — even if it’s only for half of a column! [Open full post]
And since the title of the previous post is based on a quote from legendary hotel magnate Leona Helmsley…
We don’t pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes,… it should be noted that State Represenatative Bruce Long (R-Jamestown/Middletown) appears to believe that he has also left the ranks of the little people. According to a WJAR-TV report by Jim Taricani (“I-Team: Lawmaker Admits Failing to Pay Taxes“), Rep. Long has gone several years without paying business income taxes on the revenue generated by several Del’s lemonade outlets that he owns. [Open full post]
An unbylined story in today’s Projo, working off of a report issued by the Rhode Island Secretary of State’s office, fills in some details about how the Rhode Island legislature regularly conducts the people’s business in a less-than-transparent manner…
On his way out the door, Secretary of State Matthew Brown has given state lawmakers a D grade for compliance with the law intended to keep government meetings open to the public.However, in an addition to complying with already-existing public meeting laws, an equally important reform for the legislature to undertake would be to make committee proceedings (especially vote tallies on amendments and motions to kill bills) available online.By posting no notice of a meeting, or posting a notice that goes up so late that few see it in time, a legislative committee can effectively eliminate all but lobbyists and other insiders from involvement at key points in the legislative process….
- House committees complied with the 48-hour advance notice requirements in the state’s Open Meetings Law only 57 percent of the time during the six-month legislation session that ended in late June – and that was a slight improvement over last year’s 52 percent score.
- Senate compliance dropped from 76 percent in 2005 to 67 percent.
- At 63 percent, this year’s overall score for the General Assembly was the lowest since 1998, when former Secretary of State James Langevin, who is now Rhode Island’s 2nd District congressman in Washington, issued “Access Denied: Chaos, Confusion and Closed Doors,” the first in a series of annual reports on legislative compliance with this centerpiece of the state’s open-government laws.
But the secretary of state’s analysis found that particular committees, on occasion, posted far more bills on a single evening’s agenda than House rules allow, and, worse, posted rolling multiday calendars that make it impossible for anyone — outside the ranks of plugged-in professional lobbyists — to know which day a bill might actually come up for a hearing.
The professional staff of the Rhode Island legislature does an excellent job of making the details of floor proceedings available in widely accessable electronic form in a timely manner. They should be allowed to expand their role and apply their knowledge and experience in fast-reporting of legislative activities to committee actions, so the public can more easily learn who has supported what during the committee process. [Open full post]
As we’ve been forecasting at Anchor Rising, declining oil prices are starting to impact the international landscape. This is from a Reuters report on how declining oil prices are increasing the stresses on the government of Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez…
A decline in Venezuela’s energy revenue could dog President Hugo Chavez if he is re-elected as expected on Sunday, curbing his self-styled socialist revolution that relies heavily on high oil income…What the Reuters article is hinting at, but not quite saying, is that Chavez’s heavy-handed rule — including politically motivated firings at the state run-oil company — has been alienating Venezuela’s professionals and skilled laborers, driving the knowledge base necessary for running a modern oil industry away from the country.
First, the sector’s output is shrinking for the first time in years — bad news for a government that earns more than half of its revenue from the industry.
Second, while Mr. Chavez has said he needs the average price for Venezuela’s basket of generally sludgy crude to be at $50 per barrel, a four-month slide pushed the price below that floor last week despite his promotion of OPEC cuts…
Also alarming is that private oil sector activity contracted by 11 per cent in the third quarter compared with the year-ago quarter.
And the effect has been magnified. Many former Venezuelan oil-industry workers have settled in Alberta, where they are using their expertise in refining “generally sludgy crude” to help Canada develop its tremendous heavy-oil potential. This relates very directly to the reason that OPEC is resisting production cuts proposed by Chavez; most of the OPEC nations understand that high oil prices will accelerate the development of oil alternatives, ultimately reducing the demand for conventionally obtained oil. (And somewhere in heaven, Milton Friedman smiles).
According to Reuters, the bottom line is that…
“[Chavez’s] heavy levels of social spending eventually start to cut into oil field investment,” said Maya Hernandez, an analyst with HSBC in New York. “Chavez’s popularity rests so much on oil that any weakening in that area will hit him hard”….Furthermore, on top of the industrial woe, there is scant evidence that Chavez’s “social spending” choices are improving the quality of life in Venezuela. Instead, Venezuelans are becomming increasingly victimized by violent crime. This is from an article by Sacha Feinman from yesterday’s Slate Magazine…
If oil revenue falls in 2007 — either because of lower production or falling prices — Mr. Chavez may face either runaway inflation or the need to cut government spending.
According to the United Nations, Venezuela recently passed Brazil to claim the dubious honor of having the highest rate of gun-related violence in the world among nations not at war….Lost in the media coverage of Venezuelan oil and Hugo Chávez’s colorful antics is the fact that over the last decade, Caracas has become a very dangerous place to live. Colombia might have the history, and Brazil might make splashier headlines, but Venezuela has quietly eclipsed both its neighbors in levels of violent street crime. Unlike Colombia’s narco-guerrillas or the heavily armed gangs in the favelas of Rio and São Paulo, crime in Caracas is indiscriminate; it has more to do with anarchy and the failure of infrastructure than it does organized, armed groups challenging the government’s monopoly on the use of force.A runaway murder rate is not a sign that the social agenda being implemented is a healthy one.
Finally, this past weekend, several hundred thousand people, at least, turned out in Caracas to protest the Chavez government and to express support for his opponent in the upcoming Venezuelan Presidential election — despite the fact the Chavez attemped to close the city off to outsiders. Hundreds of thousands don’t turn out to protest in a country where things are going well for the common folk. The bad news is that Chavez is likely to lash out ever more erratically as the collapse that he is bringing upon his country accelerates. [Open full post]
Heather M. Lightner in the Jamestown Press:
Every year the editors of Popular Science review thousands of new products and technologies in order to find 100 breakthroughs in 10 different categories: automotive, computing, gadgets, home entertainment, personal health, aviation and space, engineering, home, recreation, and general innovation. This year, in addition to the “Best of What’s New” award, the magazine also honored one product as the overall outstanding “Innovation of the Year” award – an award that belongs to Jamestown resident Ed Sutt and his innovative HurriQuake nail.
Sutt, who is the engineering manager of fastener technology at Bostitch in East Greenwich, has been studying the relationship between wind velocity and the failure of wood frame houses since his time at Clemson University, where he earned a PhD in civil engineering. Six years at Bostitch and hundreds of prototypes later, Sutt, also known as Dr. Nail, developed the Hurri- Quake nail, a nail that holds promise of reducing damage to buildings in the event of a hurricane or an earthquake.
Compared to standard sheathing nails, the HurriQuake nail offers up to twice the resistance to high-wind conditions, also referred to as uplift capacity. Two independent laboratory tests found that the HurriQuake nail can withstand uplift forces of up to 271 pounds per square foot. With its 25 percent larger nail head and unique geometric ring designed shank, the high-tech nails can withstand wind conditions and gusts of up to 170 miles per hour.
(OK, thanks for letting me scratch my engineering itch).
[Open full post]Edward Achorn backs up what many have already concluded: the Democrat margins of victory were attributable to straight-party (mostly Harrah’s “inspired”) voters:
[Open full post]On Nov. 7, the straight-party system worked its wonders for Rhode Island Democrats. Some 61,357 voters cast a straight-party ballot for the Democrats — a whopping increase of more than 23,000, or about two-thirds, over the last midterm election. Only 18,424 cast straight ballots for Republicans.
That obviously gave Mr. Whitehouse a dramatic boost, and quite possibly the winning edge. Subtract the straight-party ballots, and Mr. Chafee beat Mr. Whitehouse handily. It appears that Mr. Chafee was the preference of voters who actually took the time to mark their ballots for either candidate….
The people who really suffered, though, were down the ballot — the reformers trying to bring more balance to the General Assembly. They got swept away in the flood. Many of the casual voters who went straight-ticket — and thus returned the local incumbent to power — probably never heard of either candidate in those races.
After telling the Reformed University Fellowship that they wouldn’t be allowed on campus just, well, “because,” Brown University has had a change of heart. But they still haven’t been forthcoming as to why the RUF was banned in the first place.
Yesterday, Ethan Wingfield, president of the Reformed University Fellowship, said he was pleased at the Brown administration’s decision. “I think it is fantastic. It is an absolutely positive step. I’m glad we are back in contact and talking and working on a resolution.”
The campus religious group, which has about 100 members, is affiliated with Trinity Presbyterian Church, an evangelical congregation in Providence.
Restoration of the fellowship’s status as a campus group means that its members can hold meetings on campus, advertise meetings and use campus space for speakers.
While Wingfield said he was pleased with the university’s new tack, he said he is also disappointed because he believes the university wasn’t specific about why the group was suspended in the first place.
“We still haven’t been told why we were suspended,” said Wingfield.
Leaders of the group say they were given different reasons for the action. At first they were told that Trinity Presbyterian, the local sponsor, had withdrawn support, which it had not, according to the Rev. David Sherwood, Trinity pastor.
Then they were told that it was because the group’s former leader had been late in submitting the paperwork required to be established as a campus organization. The third reason given, according to fellowship leaders, was the most puzzling, they said. The Rev. Allen Callahan, Protestant chaplain, asserted they were “possessed of a leadership culture of contempt and dishonesty that has rendered all collegial relations with my office impossible.”
…The Rev. Ms. Cooper Nelson has laid out four steps that the fellowship must take to be reinstated, including filing forms on time and communicating with “full transparency” to the Rev. Mr. Callahan.
Wingfield said the standards set by the Rev. Ms. Cooper Nelson are not onerous and are pretty much what is expected of other campus organizations which seek university sanction and use of university facilities. “All we want to do is be on campus,” said Wingfield, who said the fellowship is looking forward to reinstatement, “as soon as we can get this resolved.”
Kudos to the RUF for sticking it out. If they hadn’t gone public, I think Brown would have been happy to have swept it under the rug. Of course, given this outcome, I now wonder whether it is the RUF or the University that was “possessed of a leadership culture of contempt and dishonesty.”
[Open full post]This past Friday, John Howell of the Warwick Beacon reported:
While Republican candidates across the state and the country were washed away, Warwick’s Mayor Scott Avedisian not only withstood the pull of the outgoing tide, but defied the odds by notching a nearly 68 percent win over challenger Donald Torres…
“He’s really studied government, so he does a good job,” [RI GOP Chair Patricia] Morgan said in a telephone interview Tuesday.
Morgan said Avedisian takes his job seriously, doesn’t let his ego take control and works to solve problems. She called Avedisian a “rising star” and said he is “destined for statewide office,” whether in a run for a seat that would take him to Washington or the State House…
Avedisian gained a greater percentage of the Warwick vote than any other candidate, with the exception of Congressman James Langevin and Frank Caprio, candidate for general treasurer.
Such a showing would appear to give Avedisian not only a viable shot at a statewide office, but a commanding position in the party’s ranks.
Morgan continued on her recent “Perfect Storm” riff and blamed the Laffey candidacy for splintering the party. When asked, Avedesian said he wasn’t seeking a leadership role within the GOP. But then he had to go and say “it.”
Avedisian holds out great hope for the party, observing it was “on the verge of extinction in 1974” and has held the governor’s job for the last 16 years. But he says, “It is increasingly difficult when the party drifts to the right.”
He doesn’t agree with efforts to take the party to the right.
“I think that’s the wrong way to go,” he said, “we need to come to the middle and the principles the party was founded on.” {emphasis added}
Governing a city is an entirely different animal than legislting or operating on the state-level. It demands much more pragmatism than ideology and Mayor Avedesian has been an effective leader in Warwick. Yet, before he sets his sights on higher office, I hope he reconsiders his apparent distaste with what I believe is an over-generalized caraciture of “the right.”
For every time I’ve heard Morgan talk about welcoming those from across the ideological spectrum into the RI GOP, I’ve also heard fearmongering about how a conservative turn or a “drift to the right” (usually with an overt linking of Steve Laffey to a grassroots conservative movement within the RI GOP ranks) is bad for the Party. I urge Avedesian, Morgan and others within the RI GOP hierarchy not to fall prey to over simplifications: disapproval of Senator Chafee doesn’t make one “un-moderate” nor does being conservative automatically equate to being a Laffey supporter.
I suppose that my first question is: what exactly are these “principles the party was founded on” I keep hearing about that “the right”, apparently, won’t seek to uphold? Perhaps they are the principles that Senator Chafee listed after his Senate loss: “fiscal responsibility, environmental stewardship, aversion to foreign entanglements, personal liberties.” If so, I think that Mayor Avedesian’s fear that a “drift to the right” will endanger them is misplaced. For the most part those on the “right” may disagree with “moderates” on the best way to maintain–and implement policy reflective of–those principles, but not the principles themselves.
If the RI GOP seeks to be a big tent as it claims, shouldn’t it consider actually listening to traditional conservatives who are often the most committed individuals within the GOP ranks (hint: grassroots)? Then again, too many in the old-guard RI GOP don’t really seem to care. No, I fear that a “drift to the right” is a not-too-subtle warning that anti-abortion, traditional marriage suppportin’ (“redneck”) theocons need not apply. Apparently, you can’t be anti-abortion and pro-environment or fiscally responsible at the same time. Who’s applying the litmus test now?
If such a message continues to be sent, the current RI GOP will get their wish. Instead of a RI GOP that could be revitalized with an infusion of new blood and ideas from the heretofore ignored “right,” the party will continue to be nothing more than the “yeah, but…”, Democrat-lite party it is now. All that Rhode Island conservatives ask is that they get a seat at the table to take part in the discussion about the future direction of the Party. Given that nothing else seems to be working, the RI GOP would be fools to pull a Heisman on them now.
But need I say more?
Robert Healey, Cool Moose Party Lt. Governor candidate, writes in a letter-to-the-editor that appeared in Friday’s Warwick Beacon (and probably in other local papers):
[Open full post]In the aftermath of Question 1 there is an interesting point for those who support Voter Initiative.
Too often labor and others with vested interests in maintaining the status quo of legislative access via lobbyists have indicated that the initiative process would be too easily manipulated by those special interests with money.
These opponents of initiative have already purchased their protection and see initiative as an assault on their stronghold. Thus, they argue that anyone with tons of money could use the initiative system to circumvent the process.
The vote on Question 1 is a direct confirmation that such an argument is specious. The amount of money spent in support of Question 1 dwarfed the money spent in opposition.
If, as initiative opponents state, money can buy a vote, then why was it that such did not happen?
Buying elections is still in the purview of political parties, but the reality is that because someone with money wants something it still can be voted down by an electorate after an open and public debate on the issue.
Sure, there was effort to influence opinion. Sure, there were mindless voters in the process. But, through it all, the public was heard on the issue.
So, now, just what is the argument against voter initiative? The ability to buy influence is still concentrated in the lobbying process and away from the voters, but the argument that the voters can be swayed by a corporate interest with deep pockets is no longer a realistic argument.
I don’t want the previous post to remain long untempered by a statement of my substantial admiration for Rocco, particularly now that he’s come out as Rhode Island’s blogger in Baghdad, D. Alighieri. I do not stand where he stands, nor would I declare myself in possession of the courage that he has shown.
Still, it may be the case that wise advice will come from those not in the kiln of intensity, but with eyes daily on that which can be lost.
[Open full post]