We are a little late putting this up, but you can listen in to the second half of our appearance on the Gary Nolan Show in Columbia on August 6. They only have the second hour up online, which featured Dave Roland talking about property rights and then a round robin with all three of us to close it out. I can’t think of a more productive way to spend an hour while you watch the Olympics tonight than to listen to it!

Congrats to Gary on his marriage; we thank him again for inviting us to appear while he was on vacation.

I grant you that this AP story in the Post-Dispatch is a rather extreme example. I further grant that of all occupations requiring a license, I agree that doctors need them the most. All that being said, the referenced story of institutional racism is a good example of the problems that can occur when you empower current practitioners of an occupation to decide who else gets to make a living in that occupation. For a more recent example of the abuses that can occur when businesses and unions decide to keep competition out under the guise of “safety,” you only need to go back a few years to the mechanical code disputes in St. Louis County.

Most of all, though, this story gives me a nice segue to my recent op-ed about the consideration of contractor licensing in St. Joseph. The piece was carried by the St. Joseph News-Press last week, which we greatly appreciate — but they didn’t put in online, so you’ll just have to trust me on that. …

MoDOT is trumpeting — and deservedly so — the new state highway rankings released by the Reason Foundation in their annual report on such. Missouri has improved to 13th in the country in overall highway quality, up from 28th as recently as 2004. Missourinet has the story here (link via Combest). Missouri should rightly be proud of the improvements throughout the state led by MoDOT.

The Show-Me Institute is proud of the work we have done with Reason on the subject of transportation. Yesterday, I was part of a panel at the Missouri Public Transit Association’s annual conference, talking about alternative ways of funding public transit. Tolling, competitive contracting, private investment, and public-private partnerships are the wave of the future in meeting our transportation needs for highways, bridges, and transit. Slowly but surely, I think people are beginning to embrace that change.

Hi, all:

Cynthia and I have been writing about education and voting issues nearly daily for the past few months — and we wanted to let you know that we’ll be taking a break.

We’ve reached a time-intensive point in our research. We do intend to pick up here again as soon as possible, to write more about the same. And, of course, about the conclusions that we come to after mulling over 524 superintendent contracts and hundreds of school election results.

Thank you for your comments, emails and readership. We’ve learned a lot from your responses.

— Audrey and Cynthia

P.S.: Even though we won’t be posting regularly for a while, we’re still interested in your comments, questions, or input. Feel free to email Cynthia or myself any time.

I have recently returned from a two-week road trip through the rural parts of our state, where I was out meeting people at county fairs and talking to them about how free-market policies could create greater opportunities for prosperity in their communities.

One of the most common issues that I discussed was that of school choice. While many of the people I spoke to felt that their local public schools were doing the best they could, almost everyone I spoke to agreed that parents ought to have the opportunity to send their children to the best available schools — including public schools in nearby communities, or local private schools. Most also instinctively recognized that improving the education of their young people could help to attract more and better-paying jobs to their communities. The people I spoke to made it resoundingly clear that education is definitely an issue that is important to folks in rural Missouri.

In the midst of my trip, I had the pleasure of stopping in Kansas City to attend a celebration of Milton Friedman’s life and career. For those who don’t know, Friedman was a Nobel laureate who proposed school choice as the best solution for providing publicly funded education. In honor of his birthday, organizations across the nation hosted a total of 50 events to promote and celebrate his ideas. Here in Missouri, the Show-Me Institute co-hosted an event with the Kansas City Public Library at which Kevin Chavous, a nationally respected attorney and school choice advocate, discussed the importance of education reform in America. Nearly 100 people attended, and it was absolutely exhilarating to see so many people come out in support of improving educational opportunities for the children of this state.

I highly recommend that you check out the library’s video of this event, as well as Chavous’ recent book!

Show-Me Institute staff and scholars are hosting the Gary Nolan show this afternoon while Gary is on vacation. We will be discussing education reforms, property rights, and toll roads from 4 to 6 p.m. on The Eagle 93.9 FM. If you are in the Columbia area, please listen in. If outside Columbia, enjoy the online listening application to tune in. Basically, you have no excuses if you fail to listen. …

Those of you who read this blog for in-depth analysis and riveting commentary, I’m sure you haven’t noticed my absence, but for everyone else: I HAVE RETURNED! After a wonderful week in San Diego, I have returned to my cubicle and have resumed normal intern duties. St. Louis is just as I remember — hot, humid, and no beaches.

The past week was an awesome experience. For those of you who don’t know, my fellow intern Dan Grana and I were Bastiat scholars at Cato University, which is a weeklong seminar organized by the Cato Institute that focuses on enhancing freedom and liberty through lectures and discussions. It is a great experience, and I recommend it to any libertarian — or anyone who is just generally interested in promoting freedom. Although the days were somewhat long (9 a.m. to 9 p.m.), it was completely worth it. The days were filled with incredible speakers, ranging from Tom G. Palmer of the Cato Institute to Rejoice Ngwenya, who is a leader against Zimbabwe’s corrupt president, Robert Mugabe. Even after the daily lectures were finished, the conversation continued. We spent most nights at the Veranda Grill discussing liberty and other issues with like-minded individuals.

The entire week was a first-class experience. The food and hotel were awesome, and the speakers were even better. Before I arrived in San Diego, I was a little apprehensive about the trip. I was worried that the speakers would not be entertaining, or the days would be too long, but it turned out that my notions were unwarranted. Again, if anyone ever has the opportunity to go to Cato University, I highly recommend it. I’m even thinking about going again next year.

I will be a guest on The McGraw Show, with Mr. Millhaven himself, this Monday morning on KTRS — The Big 550 AM. I will be talking about whatever McGraw wants to talk about, be it ethanol, tax incentives, or earnings taxes. I am excited to be appearing on the show — please listen in, if you can!

Over at the Post-Dispatch, gubernatorial primary hopeful Sarah Steelman participated in a live Q&A session with the readers. Here is one interesting question:

Joe Hodes, St. Louis: Ms. Steelman,

I was inclined to vote for you until I saw your ad on the ethanol mandate. While corn ethanol has been shown to play a tiny part in driving up food prices (far less than foreign demand, oil prices and speculation), it has driven DOWN the cost of gas by 10 cents or more a gallon.

There have been over a dozen studies by universities, economists, researchers and even the energy industry showing that ethanol REDUCES the cost of gasoline–Missouri’s E10 mandate leads MO to have the CHEAPEST GAS in the nation.

Yet you say in your ad that the ethanol mandate has caused gas prices to rise. No one–even ethanol’s other critics–has been foolish enough to make such a counter-factual statement.

How could you get your facts so wrong?

Thanks,

Joe Hodes
St. Louis, MO

The mandate may be keeping the price of gas 10 cents lower than otherwise, but this gain is lost once you take into account the decreased efficiency of ethanol. E-10 fuel is 2.5 percent less efficient than regular gas, meaning it takes more fuel to go the same distance that normal gasoline would allow. If you want to drive 100 miles with a car that gets 20 miles per gallon, with ordinary gas costing $4 per gallon at the pump, it will cost you $20 for 5 gallons.

With E-10, fuel only costs $3.90 per gallon at the pump, but you now need 5.125 gallons to travel 100 miles, costing you $19.99. A paltry savings of one cent. But this analysis so far doesn’t even take into account the ethanol subsidy that Missouri taxpayers pay. That subsidy is currently 51 cents per gallon, and will fall to 45 cents when the new farm bill takes effect. So, it would actually cost you an additional $2.61 to drive 100 miles, but that cost is paid in taxes instead of at the pump. So, it comes to $22.60 for the same trip. If all actual costs were shown at the pump, E-10 would be priced at 41 cents per gallon more than normal gasoline.

Here is Steelman’s response:

Sarah Steelman: The facts speak for themselves. The studies from the Missouri Corn Growers and others don’t take into account the subsidies that we pay on our tax bills for ethanol. Secondly, they don’t take into account the decreased fuel efficiency of ethanol, meaning that you have to fill up your tank more times to go the same distance. I would invite you to read the Show-Me Institute’s recent study on the topic. The Show-Me Institute, unlike other groups, does not have a financial interest in ethanol. The Show-Me Institute study states that the ethanol mandate will cost Missourians over $1 billion over the next decade. This figure doesn’t even take into account the increased price of food caused by the mandate. I am the only candidate willing to stand up against the special interests who forced the ethanol mandate on our state. If ethanol can stand on its own two feet, let it do so in the free market.

Check and mate. The study in question, detailing the real costs involved with Missouri’s ethanol mandate, can be found on the Show-Me Institute website.

The Show-Me Institute appeared in two major newspapers this past weekend. The Kansas City Star carried an op-ed by Dr. Joe Haslag, which johncombest.com also linked. To review the full op-ed (the Star had to do some length editing) you can check on the version hosted by the Missouri Political News Service.

The Springfield News-Leader also ran a very detailed article on ethanol use in Missouri, written by Chad Livengood. I was quoted a few times in it, and wish to make one correction. The article says that our study did not count the decrease in fuel efficiency that results from using E-10 fuel instead of ordinary gasoline, as part of the additional cost to Missouri drivers. Actually, our study does include it as part of the additional cost. I may have misspoke in my phone interview, or perhaps was unclear somehow, but it’s not a big deal — these things happen, and blogs are a quick and convenient way to make a brief correction. While our study was a very focused piece, this News-Leader article takes a wide look at ethanol in Missouri and I recommend it highly.

You will have to excuse the title- I just watched Karate Kid.

Today’s Kansas City Star has an editorial (link via Combest) discussing Missouri’s judicial selection process. Luckily for us, some think tank in Missouri has already issued a study about the judicial selection process and its superiority to other forms of judicial selection.

Show-Me Institute policy analyst David Stokes will be interviewed Monday morning at 7:10 a.m. on the Allman and Crane show, broadcast on 97.1 FM Talk. Stokes will be talking about his recently published case study, “The Economic Impact of the Missouri E-10 Ethanol Mandate,” which he cowrote with Justin Hauke.

Be sure to tune in, and tell your friends to do the same!

For those of you considering the possibility of a fall internship with the Show-Me Institute, this is a reminder that applications are due today. We’ll continue to accept applications until Monday, so those who have learned about our internship program just now, from this very blog entry, will have time to put an application together.

If you’re a college student, we’d love to consider you. If you know a college student, be sure to spread the word about this great opportunity.

Our own David Stokes had an interview yesterday with KQTV Channel 2, based in St. Joesph, discussing the institute’s newly released ethanol study. Here is a synopsis of the the interview; in the meantime, we are working on getting a video link.

After months of blandishments from an eager staff, the Show-Me Institute’s powers that be have given us the green light to open comments on this blog. We’d love to hear from you, and we hope that our comment sections will help Show-Me Daily serve as a forum for vigorous, active debate.

All we ask, really, is that participants keep the tone civil, and try to offer something substantive. We assiduously work to avoid insults and and ad hominem attacks in our posts, and we hope our readers will follow suit. Disagreements are fine, but remember that this is an opportunity to discuss policy — don’t make it personal.

That said, welcome to our now-interactive blog! Let us know what you think.

We were all over the airwaves of Missouri yesterday, talking about ethanol and our recent case study. Justin, sitting at a very impressive desk, appeared on Columbia’s KMIZ-TV as part of a well-done sort of point-counterpoint piece. The ethanol supporters admitted that ethanol has a lower energy content than ordinary gasoline, but said this difference is too small to measure — as though math can’t measure small numbers, which add up to millions of dollars a year statewide, or $29 a year in added costs for the average Missouri driver. That ain’t so small anymore.

I, myself, was a guest on the Mark Reardon show (to listen, click on the podcast at the right side of that page) on KMOX radio in St. Louis. We both appreciated the opportunity to discuss the issue, and thank both KMIZ and KMOX for the invites.

I will be appearing on KMOX’s Mark Reardon Show today from 2:10 to 2:30 p.m. to discuss our recent ethanol case study. Please go to kmox.com to listen in.

The Show-Me Institute recently announced its fall internship program. For those interested in applying, the internship will run from early September through early- to mid-December, and will be based at the Show-Me Institute’s Clayton office near Saint Louis. Applications are due on July 3.

If you’re wondering what a Show-Me Institute internship is like, you may want to read this blog entry by our Spring 2007 intern, Steve Bernstetter.

Here’s a quote from one of our Summer 2007 interns, Maurice Harris:

The Show-Me Institute provided me with the opportunity to do research on policy that I was interested in and that has an effect on many people in Missouri. I enjoyed the statewide focus of the institute, where the research could have a direct effect on policy and can be seen quickly. Overall, being at a place where they give interns vast opportunities really taught me a lot and encouraged me to pursue my interests.

How about this quote from our Spring 2008 intern, Nicholas Loyal:

The last four months have been an invaluable experience for me in terms of developing an idea of policy work, and seeing this organization achieve so much at such an early stage has really given me hope that positive change can be affected in the world through a small group of dedicated individuals. I’ll never forget the lessons I learned, I’ll never forget seeing my name in print, and I’ll never forget all that you all have done for me.

If you’re a college student (or you know one) who would like to have a similar experience conducting real research and making a difference in the world of Missouri public policy, apply today!

Special thanks to the St. Joseph News-Press for reporting on an op-ed I wrote a few weeks ago. I hope that this coverage opens some debate about a relatively obscure bill that is in danger of being signed.

From the report:

The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Jake Zimmerman, D-Olivette, Mo., has a degree in economics and law degree from Harvard. He refers to the Show-Me Institute analysis as “over simplistic and flawed.”

“If you’ll pardon the expression,” Mr. Zimmerman said, “he’s taking a freshman year economics textbook approach to the problem, which does not accurately reflect the real world circumstances that we’re talking about.”

I urge readers to critically read my op-ed to search for the deficiencies Mr. Zimmerman is referring to. I agree that the interaction between supply and demand is essential to any freshman economics course, but I don’t agree that it is inappropriately considered in my commentary. His criticism would be more satisfying if it was specific.

Mr. Zimmerman correctly points out that my take on the bill hasn’t "drummed up any public outcry." I hope that the small publicity it recently received engages Missourians outside of academia and the legislature to give this bill a hard look as it sits on the governor’s desk. After all, you can’t oppose poor legislation if you don’t know it exists.

I want to take the time to respond to an article in the Michigan Messenger attacking Dr. Michael Pakko, one of the Show-Me Institute’s academic scholars.

Dr. Pakko’s research on smoking bans has played an influential role in the Michigan legislature as the state considers a statewide smoking ban. We applaud his research and the impact it has had in demonstrating how government interference adversely affects economic growth and public welfare.

The Michigan Messenger does a disservice to its readers and to the public debate in general by attempting to defraud the merits of the study by attacking the author’s "affiliations." (The Michigan Messenger argues that Dr. Pakko’s findings are driven by ties to "big tobacco" donors.)

Because Dr. Pakko is (marginally) affiliated with the Show-Me Institute, and because we received a grant from the Cato Institute, which has itself received donations from tobacco companies, the author argues that somehow these six degrees of separation are biasing Dr. Pakko’s results.

First of all, the Show-Me Institute stands behind Dr. Pakko and his research on public smoking bans throughout the state. As a former employee of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, I can personally attest to the quality and objectivity of his research.

But, more importantly, the accusation is completely baseless. Dr. Pakko has never received any funding from the Show-Me Institute for any current or previous research (or any other service). The articles in question were published by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis completely independently from the Show-Me Institute. Neither the Federal Reserve nor the Show-Me Institute accept "contract work," and any donation the Show-Me Institute has received that could somehow be connected indirectly to tobacco firms has no bearing on our research topics or their conclusions. In fact, our non-profit charter as a "public charity" explicitly prevents us from engaging in any policy work with a specific donor-driven agenda.

Again, I just want to reiterate that the Show-Me Institute is a "free-market think tank" — not a "libertarian think tank" or a "conservative think tank" — and that we do not support, endorse, or promote any political party or specific public policy agenda or legislation.

But you guys already knew that.

Our thoughts and prayers are with John on the passing of his mother.

Over at The Atlantic, James Fallows has the winner in a great contest about stupid public policy decisions. I encourage you to read the whole list, but please save special attention for our dear winner and Missouri favorite, ethanol.

I meant Judith Viorst, not Judy Blume. While I assure you that I put a great deal of research into the substantive parts of my blog posts, sometimes I just let the references flow. At least Sarah got it right, which I am sure she will politely remind me of the next time we disagree on something. Have a nice weekend, everyone. Go Cardinals!

If you are a fan of our blog you may not have seen some of the latest op-eds and other articles we have released lately on the main site. Sarah Brodsky has just sent out an article on the benefits of tuition tax-credits for children with autism.

Dr. Joe Haslag and Rex Sinquefield have written quite extensively on the Bombardier proposal before the Missouri General Assembly now, and have been among the few to actually run the numbers and question the deal’s assumptions.

Our soon-to-exit intern Nick Loyal and I co-wrote a piece on one of Missouri’s silliest and least defensible taxes: the local pool table tax. Ironically, the supervisor of the largest pool hall in the state of Missouri (as mentioned in the article), Fr. Hagan at St. Louis University High School, died a few days ago after decades of dedication to educaton and SLUH. "Nickel!"

Last night I attended, along with little Nathaniel, my first meeting of the Show-Me Institute Book Club. The book was Barry Goldwater’s "The Conscience of a Conservative." As one of the only conservative staffers here at SMI (most of our staff really are libertarians), there was no way I could miss a disucssion about Barry Goldwater. The point of this post is not politics, though, it is to let people know how enjoyable the book club discussion was and to encourage college-age people in our area to consider participating in it. Here is the rundown on the club, and I recommend it very highly!

Today, the Show-Me Institute released a new interactive tax estimator, "Show-Me: The Taxes." Here’s more:

Nobody likes to pay taxes, but no matter where you live or work, some level of taxation is a certainty. Not all locations are the same, though. Sometimes, moving just a few miles down the road may have a significant effect on how much of your own money you get to keep. Unfortunately, though, most people don’t have the resources to compare tax rates for cities and counties throughout the state.

You might well wonder: How much am I paying in taxes? Are my property taxes comparable to the Missouri average? How much tax am I paying on my purchases at the grocery store? Does where I live affect my overall tax burden?

Wouldn’t it be nice if there were a way to quickly receive answers to these and other Missouri tax-related questions?

The Show-Me Institute’s Missouri Tax Estimator can help. We’ve collected tax rates from cities and counties across the state to help Missourians better understand the taxes they pay.

The estimator is an interactive Microsoft Excel worksheet, with its macros digitally signed for your protection. It calculates your expected tax burden based on the information you provide, then allows you to change a variable or two in a comparison column, to see how your bottom line might change if you, say, moved to a different town or paid down some debt. It’s both informative and fun — check it out, and tell your friends!

If you have time, you can listen to the full radio interview I did with Vincent David Jericho by scrolling down here to the link about tax increment financing (or using the direct MP3 link). You can also listen to the end-of-day summary Vince does about all his guests, which is the top link on that page. I enjoyed being in Springfield on the show, and I thank Vince for the opportunity to appear.

I am excited to be appearing on the Vincent David Jericho show tomorrow morning to discuss my recent writings about tax increment financing. If you are in the Springfield area, please listen in during the 7 a.m. hour.

The Show-Me Institute, in conjunction with Saint Louis University, is sponsoring the second lecture in its Series on Economic policy on Thursday, April 17. The speaker, James Guthrie, will address the question, "How Much Money Will It Take to Give America Good Schools?" Here’s a snippet from Guthrie’s bio:

James Guthrie is a professor of public policy and education, chair of the Leadership, Policy, and Organizations department, and director of the Peabody Center for Education Policy at Peabody College of Vanderbilt University. He instructs both undergraduate and graduate courses, and conducts research on education policy and finance. He is founder and chairman of the board of Management Analysis & Planning, Inc. (MAP), a private sector management consulting firm specializing in public finance and litigation support.

A pre-event reception will begin at 3:30 p.m. on April 17, with the lecture beginning at 4:00. If you, or anybody you know, may be interested in further examining the complex issues surrounding school finance, be sure to take a look at the event invitation, and then register online.

Today is the application deadline for summer internships at the Show-Me Institute. But, because we’re so nice, we’ll continue to accept applications through Monday.

If you know any college students who may be interested, be sure to let them know. If you’re a college student currently on the fence about whether you should apply, perhaps this testimonial from our former intern Steve Bernstetter will push you over the edge:

Seriously, these guys do great work, are really nice people, and are spearheading a movement with great promise for affecting positive change. Whether you’re a naive young grad student like myself, looking to change the world for the better, or a grizzled cynical veteran of the politics game simply looking for a breath of fresh political air, you’d be a fool to pass up this opportunity.

Well said, Steve. Again.