Politico reports that Green Donors are doing some soul searching. Having spent half a billion dollars on climate change, with little to show for the investment, they are wondering if the money could have been put to better use.
I have cataloged millions of those dollars coming to Minnesota on my Follow the Money page.
By all means, let's have that discussion. Danish academic Bjorn Lomborg has been involved in an effort called the Copenhagen Consensus, with the idea of identifying those environmental priorities that should be tackled first, in a resource-constrained world. The original 2004 conference identified opportunities to fight HIV/AIDS, improve water supplies, combat malnutrition: climate change measures ranked last.
What could those donors have accomplished if they had put that $500,000,000 toward improving water supplies in Africa? They world will never know.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Profits of Doom
On Minnpost, TV's Don Shelby uses his weekly column to discuss how the nation's greatest climate experts--tired of losing ground to the "deniers"--are using "tougher language" to make their case.
Shelby writes, "We are facing the fight of our lives!" The other thought is one I haven't had since I was a soldier. It is: "If there is going to be a fight, thank God I'm in uniform with these guys on point."
Meanwhile, the New York Post prints a column on "Profits of Doom", a catalog of decades of failed doomsaying from the greatest minds of the environmental community.
Says the Post, "Scientists love to see their names in print, don’t they? Coincidentally, they also love grant money, book deals, awards. The easiest way to obtain these things is by alarmism. No one ever made a buck saying, “The situation in the future will be pretty similar to what it is now.”
"We report, you decide."
Shelby writes, "We are facing the fight of our lives!" The other thought is one I haven't had since I was a soldier. It is: "If there is going to be a fight, thank God I'm in uniform with these guys on point."
Meanwhile, the New York Post prints a column on "Profits of Doom", a catalog of decades of failed doomsaying from the greatest minds of the environmental community.
Says the Post, "Scientists love to see their names in print, don’t they? Coincidentally, they also love grant money, book deals, awards. The easiest way to obtain these things is by alarmism. No one ever made a buck saying, “The situation in the future will be pretty similar to what it is now.”
"We report, you decide."
Enviro Tax Threatens Green Research in UK
An early nominee for headline of the year is this on from The Guardian:
"Environmental tax threatens green energy research in UK"
It turns out that the UK's green energy tax is pricing basic green energy research out of the country. So, of course, the researchers are lobbying for an exemption. Taxes for thee, but not for me.
(Via Rush Limbaugh and a Facebook friend)
"Environmental tax threatens green energy research in UK"
It turns out that the UK's green energy tax is pricing basic green energy research out of the country. So, of course, the researchers are lobbying for an exemption. Taxes for thee, but not for me.
(Via Rush Limbaugh and a Facebook friend)
Niall Ferguson: Austerity Works
Newsweek's Niall Ferguson warns Washington that it is not learning the lesson of Europe: austerity works.
(Via InstaPundit)
Pre-emptive strike. Ramesh Ponnuru links to Salon.com's rant against Ferguson. Speak truth to power and they will tag even a Harvard professor as a rabid right-winter.
(Via InstaPundit)
Pre-emptive strike. Ramesh Ponnuru links to Salon.com's rant against Ferguson. Speak truth to power and they will tag even a Harvard professor as a rabid right-winter.
Nuclear Power and Post-Modern Lawmaking
Germany has decided to phase out nuclear power over the next 10 years, in another example of "post-modern" lawmaking. Before the Japanese nuclear disaster, nuclear accounted for about 25 percent of Germany's electric output. A number of older units were shut down after the disaster in Japan and these will not be restarted. Remaining units will be shut down by 2022.
Now the obvious questions begin. What will happen to prices? A senior government official says the "goal to keep a levy for the costs of expanding renewable energy at 3.5 euro cents (5 U.S. cents) per kilowatt hour is “ambitious,” according to Bloomberg.
According to the BBC, Chancellor Merkel says that the move "can make her country a trailblazer in renewable energy" and "Germany could set an example for other countries."
The BBC analysis from Stephen Evans (linked above) tries to answer the question, "Where will the power come from?"
Now the obvious questions begin. What will happen to prices? A senior government official says the "goal to keep a levy for the costs of expanding renewable energy at 3.5 euro cents (5 U.S. cents) per kilowatt hour is “ambitious,” according to Bloomberg.
According to the BBC, Chancellor Merkel says that the move "can make her country a trailblazer in renewable energy" and "Germany could set an example for other countries."
The BBC analysis from Stephen Evans (linked above) tries to answer the question, "Where will the power come from?"
- More efficiency. Unfortunately, the BBC's Evans and the Federal Republic of Germany are unfamiliar with the Jevons Paradox.
- More wind. Evans reports that the German transmission system will need to be reconfigured to move more wind power from off-shore. There is growing opposition to new on-shore wind.
- More coal?
- More nuclear from France and Poland?
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Walter Russell Mead Calls It: California a Failed State
Walter Russell Mead takes note of the U.S. Supreme Court decision that forces California to release up to 46,000 prisoners to ease overcrowding. Mead writes,
"California meets the strict test of state failure: it can no longer enforce the law within its frontiers. Let there be no mistake: when you produce so many criminals that you can’t afford to lock them up, you are a failed state. Virtually every important civil institution in society has to fail to get you to this point."
What we need is a new compact between citizen and state. Clearly the old one is no longer working.
"California meets the strict test of state failure: it can no longer enforce the law within its frontiers. Let there be no mistake: when you produce so many criminals that you can’t afford to lock them up, you are a failed state. Virtually every important civil institution in society has to fail to get you to this point."
What we need is a new compact between citizen and state. Clearly the old one is no longer working.
Coal Power and "Post-Modern" Lawmaking
According to the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration (EIA),
"Coal-fired power plants typically account for roughly three-fifths of Minnesota’s electricity generation."
But back in 2007, the state of Minnesota decided to ban new coal power, ignoring the fact that that coal provides 60 percent of our power needs.
It was decided that Minnesota should be more like California on energy. According to the EIA,
"Due to strict emission laws, only a few small coal-fired power plants operate in California."
California gets about half of its electricity from natural gas and is a big producer of hydro- and wind-power. This mix is exactly the vision laid out by Governor Dayton in his veto letter on Senate File 86, the bill to overturn the 2007 coal ban, passed by the state legislature this month on a bi-partisan basis.
Fast forward four years and it's clear that California, as a state and a society, is close to collapse. Read Victor Davis Hanson for on-the-scene reporting of the advanced state of decline that is California.
But California continues to hold many in its spell. As in California, this whole exercise with coal in Minnesota is a prime example of what Daniel Hannan, MEP, calls "post-modern" or "aspirational lawmaking". Rather than dealing with the facts as they exist, "the real purpose of such initiatives is to make the law-makers feel good about themselves", as Hannan explains. Some don't like coal power and resent that we rely on the stuff for 60 percent of our needs: so we symbolically ban coal to show our disapproval, not to solve our immediate energy problems. As a practical solution, the coal ban is worthless. But as statute it is just another drop in the drip-drip of Minnesota's life-force ebbing away.
As the song goes,
"A sun-kissed miss said 'don't be late!'
That's why I can hardly wait
Open up that golden gate
California, here I come!"
"Coal-fired power plants typically account for roughly three-fifths of Minnesota’s electricity generation."
But back in 2007, the state of Minnesota decided to ban new coal power, ignoring the fact that that coal provides 60 percent of our power needs.
It was decided that Minnesota should be more like California on energy. According to the EIA,
"Due to strict emission laws, only a few small coal-fired power plants operate in California."
California gets about half of its electricity from natural gas and is a big producer of hydro- and wind-power. This mix is exactly the vision laid out by Governor Dayton in his veto letter on Senate File 86, the bill to overturn the 2007 coal ban, passed by the state legislature this month on a bi-partisan basis.
Fast forward four years and it's clear that California, as a state and a society, is close to collapse. Read Victor Davis Hanson for on-the-scene reporting of the advanced state of decline that is California.
But California continues to hold many in its spell. As in California, this whole exercise with coal in Minnesota is a prime example of what Daniel Hannan, MEP, calls "post-modern" or "aspirational lawmaking". Rather than dealing with the facts as they exist, "the real purpose of such initiatives is to make the law-makers feel good about themselves", as Hannan explains. Some don't like coal power and resent that we rely on the stuff for 60 percent of our needs: so we symbolically ban coal to show our disapproval, not to solve our immediate energy problems. As a practical solution, the coal ban is worthless. But as statute it is just another drop in the drip-drip of Minnesota's life-force ebbing away.
As the song goes,
"A sun-kissed miss said 'don't be late!'
That's why I can hardly wait
Open up that golden gate
California, here I come!"
Al Gore Wins in Minnesota!
In the end, Al Gore got his wish and Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton vetoed the bill to repeal the state's ban on new coal power (Senate File 86/House File 72). The bill passed with bipartisan majorities, but no matter: the fact that the state relies on coal for more than 50 percent of its needs is just an inconvenient fact to be waived away.
Coverage of the story is spotty, as the Dayton Administration made their move late afternoon on a Friday, ahead of a long holiday weekend, to avoid any chance of bad press. Here is the AP story.
Coverage of the story is spotty, as the Dayton Administration made their move late afternoon on a Friday, ahead of a long holiday weekend, to avoid any chance of bad press. Here is the AP story.
(Updated) Decline is a Choice: the Regulatory State and Magna Carta
As a recovering regulator myself, I read with even greater interest Mark Steyn's syndicated column this week on the subject of the regulatory state.
As always, Steyn says it best himself,
"The hyper-regulatory state is unrepublican. It strikes at one of the most basic pillars of free society: equality before the law. When you replace "law" with "regulation," equality before it is one of the first casualties. In such a world, there is no law, only a hierarchy of privilege more suited to a sultan's court than a self-governing republic."
In reading Steyn's column, and musing on the subjects of regulation and equality before the law, I recalled the decade-old case of John Thoburn, of Fairfax County, Virginia, who committed the unpardonable crime of owning a golf driving range in America. Actually his crime was owning a range in competition with the County's range. A crime for which he was eventually jailed.
Also this weekend, I am reading more of the history of Magna Carta. The 800-year-old document that established the principle that no-one, not even the Crown, is above the law holds more relevance than ever. Let us celebrate the anniversary of this indispensable document on June 15th.
(Updated: Mark Steyn's old boss, Conrad Black, touches on similar themes in his column in Canada's National Post. H/T InstaPundit)
As always, Steyn says it best himself,
"The hyper-regulatory state is unrepublican. It strikes at one of the most basic pillars of free society: equality before the law. When you replace "law" with "regulation," equality before it is one of the first casualties. In such a world, there is no law, only a hierarchy of privilege more suited to a sultan's court than a self-governing republic."
In reading Steyn's column, and musing on the subjects of regulation and equality before the law, I recalled the decade-old case of John Thoburn, of Fairfax County, Virginia, who committed the unpardonable crime of owning a golf driving range in America. Actually his crime was owning a range in competition with the County's range. A crime for which he was eventually jailed.
Also this weekend, I am reading more of the history of Magna Carta. The 800-year-old document that established the principle that no-one, not even the Crown, is above the law holds more relevance than ever. Let us celebrate the anniversary of this indispensable document on June 15th.
(Updated: Mark Steyn's old boss, Conrad Black, touches on similar themes in his column in Canada's National Post. H/T InstaPundit)
Friday, May 27, 2011
The Budget Debate, Part 8: "Arithmetic Still Matters"
"Arithmetic still matters" was a quote, spoken by Bill Clinton, included in Peggy Noonan's column this week.
Noonan writes,
"The American establishment has finally come around, in unison, to admitting that America is in crisis, that our debt actually threatens our ability to endure, that if we don't make progress on this, we are going to near our endpoint as a nation. I am struck very recently by the number of leaders in American business, politics and journalism who now get a certain faraway look at the end of an evening or a meal and say, 'It's worse than people think, you know.' "
I agree. But then the next question to be asked of any leader, of either party is "What is your plan?"
Noonan writes,
"The American establishment has finally come around, in unison, to admitting that America is in crisis, that our debt actually threatens our ability to endure, that if we don't make progress on this, we are going to near our endpoint as a nation. I am struck very recently by the number of leaders in American business, politics and journalism who now get a certain faraway look at the end of an evening or a meal and say, 'It's worse than people think, you know.' "
I agree. But then the next question to be asked of any leader, of either party is "What is your plan?"
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Updated: Glenn Hubbard and the Growth Agenda
Update: At the Thursday ECOM speech, Dean Hubbard previewed his column published Friday in the Financial Times (subscription required). Entitled "Forget the debt ceiling and focus on debt", it's worth reading.
The other event I attended today was the Economic Club of Minnesota's May Luncheon featuring R. Glenn Hubbard. Professor Hubbard is now dean of Columbia University's Business School and was Chairman of the U.S. Council of Economic Advisers, from 2001 to 2003.
Dean Hubbard's talk centered on economic growth and he made the important point that small improvements to economic growth rates have an outsized impact on ordinary peoples' lives because of the compounding effect. He outlined a Growth Agenda for state and national policy to promote growth.
To that point, Dean Hubbard remarked that we have about 5,000 years of recorded history. For the first 4,800 years, living standards changed little. Over the past 200 years, beginning with the Industrial Revolution, material well-being, life expectancy, and quality of life have all greatly improved, to levels unimaginable to the person living in the 18th century. And I would add that we seem eager as a society, for some reason, to throw it all away.
The other event I attended today was the Economic Club of Minnesota's May Luncheon featuring R. Glenn Hubbard. Professor Hubbard is now dean of Columbia University's Business School and was Chairman of the U.S. Council of Economic Advisers, from 2001 to 2003.
Dean Hubbard's talk centered on economic growth and he made the important point that small improvements to economic growth rates have an outsized impact on ordinary peoples' lives because of the compounding effect. He outlined a Growth Agenda for state and national policy to promote growth.
To that point, Dean Hubbard remarked that we have about 5,000 years of recorded history. For the first 4,800 years, living standards changed little. Over the past 200 years, beginning with the Industrial Revolution, material well-being, life expectancy, and quality of life have all greatly improved, to levels unimaginable to the person living in the 18th century. And I would add that we seem eager as a society, for some reason, to throw it all away.
The Budget Debate, Part 7: Demography, We are too old to pay higher taxes
In this post, I examine the role of demography in Minnesota's budget debate. From U.S. Census Data, this table shows the state's median age from 1880 to 2010.
Back in the frontiers days of the 19th century, we were a young and growing state, with a median age of 20 years. Over the decades, that number drifted upward to 30.6 years in 1950. Then the baby boom pushed to number back down to 26.8 in 1970, a number not seen in Minnesota since the roaring 1920's.
So we can see that the "Minnesota Miracle" of 1971 occurred at an unusual time in the state's demographic history. 1970 was an inflection point, the fall in median age reversed with the baby bust and we are now (2010) the oldest society (37.4 years) ever to occupy this land.
Back in 1971, you can see how the "Miracle" increase in taxes didn't look like such a bad proposition. A young society had plenty of earning years remaining to overcome the drag of higher taxes, and still save enough for retirement. The relatively young state needed more investment in its large school age population. And the state's population was young enough to be around to enjoy the benefits of that investment.
Fast forward to 2011: aging baby boomers are, in large part, driving the pressure for more spending on health care. But our median age is now 11 years older than it was in 1970. We are a middle-aged society and no longer have the luxury of time to earn enough to overcome the higher taxes the Governor proposes.
What looked good in 1971 as a policy alternative can't be sustained with 2011's demography.
| Census | Median Age |
| 2010 | 37.4 |
| 2000 | 35.4 |
| 1990 | 32.4 |
| 1980 | 29.3 |
| 1970 | 26.8 |
| 1960 | 28.5 |
| 1950 | 30.6 |
| 1940 | 29.5 |
| 1930 | 27.2 |
| 1920 | 25.3 |
| 1910 | 23.7 |
| 1900 | 22.0 |
| 1890 | 21.7 |
| 1880 | 20.1 |
Back in the frontiers days of the 19th century, we were a young and growing state, with a median age of 20 years. Over the decades, that number drifted upward to 30.6 years in 1950. Then the baby boom pushed to number back down to 26.8 in 1970, a number not seen in Minnesota since the roaring 1920's.
So we can see that the "Minnesota Miracle" of 1971 occurred at an unusual time in the state's demographic history. 1970 was an inflection point, the fall in median age reversed with the baby bust and we are now (2010) the oldest society (37.4 years) ever to occupy this land.
Back in 1971, you can see how the "Miracle" increase in taxes didn't look like such a bad proposition. A young society had plenty of earning years remaining to overcome the drag of higher taxes, and still save enough for retirement. The relatively young state needed more investment in its large school age population. And the state's population was young enough to be around to enjoy the benefits of that investment.
Fast forward to 2011: aging baby boomers are, in large part, driving the pressure for more spending on health care. But our median age is now 11 years older than it was in 1970. We are a middle-aged society and no longer have the luxury of time to earn enough to overcome the higher taxes the Governor proposes.
What looked good in 1971 as a policy alternative can't be sustained with 2011's demography.
Undernews: the Real Unemployment Story
Scott Johnson at Power Line explores the under-reported real story of this recession: unemployment. We are in the middle of losing two generations of workers: new entrants (new college grads) who can't find that first entry-level, career-track job, and late-career professionals who were laid off a few years ago and now staff the ranks of the long-term unemployed. Unfortunately, policies at the federal and state level seem designed to produce this outcome, from which we will suffer for decades.
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Follow the Money: Minnesota Media
I was connected through Twitter to this post from the NPR Ombudsman Alicia Shepard. She writes about some internal uneasiness within NPR regarding a grant they accepted from George Soros' Open Society Foundations. This $1.8 million grant was announced last fall and will help fund local political coverage of state government.
Simply speaking, groups like Soros' give money to NPR because it will provide a good return on investment.
I was curious to see if there was a Minnesota angle to this story, and I was not disappointed. Shepard writes,
"Soros' foundations gave 34 grants from 1997 to 2010 to local NPR member stations and specific programs that have totaled nearly $3.4-million, said the foundations' Archuleta. Recipients included WNYC and Minnesota Public Radio."
Searching the data base at http://www.soros.org/ (no, really, that's the website), I came up with these additional gems,
Simply speaking, groups like Soros' give money to NPR because it will provide a good return on investment.
I was curious to see if there was a Minnesota angle to this story, and I was not disappointed. Shepard writes,
"Soros' foundations gave 34 grants from 1997 to 2010 to local NPR member stations and specific programs that have totaled nearly $3.4-million, said the foundations' Archuleta. Recipients included WNYC and Minnesota Public Radio."
Searching the data base at http://www.soros.org/ (no, really, that's the website), I came up with these additional gems,
- American Independent News Network, Washington, DC, 2009, $75,000, one year, The purpose of this grant is to support American Independent News Network (formerly the Center for Independent Media) in providing high-quality investigative reporting on federal agencies and Congressional delegations from the American Independent News Network's program states, including Colorado, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota and New Mexico, through the Network's Washington news site, The Washington Independent.
Infinity Project, Minneapolis, MN, 2009, Minneapolis, MN $170,000, two years, This grant supports the Infinity Project, based at the University of Minnesota, in its efforts to increase the diversity of the federal bench.
State Government and Reform
My state Representative, Keith Downey (R-Edina), has an opinion piece in this morning's Star Tribune making the important point that it was more than just the budget that the Governor vetoed yesterday. Vetoed along with the appropriations were some needed basic reforms of how state government conducts its business. Also, more experimental ideas, such as the human capital bonds, went down in flames.
Here is an idea that I think both right and left can agree on--whatever priorities that we set for government, those priorities should be undertaken in the most efficient manner possible. If you truly care about the services government provides, we need to develop some 21st century delivery approaches. Sticking with no longer workable approaches and practices from the 1960's and '70's will only guarantee that the whole system will collapse just that much sooner.
Here is an idea that I think both right and left can agree on--whatever priorities that we set for government, those priorities should be undertaken in the most efficient manner possible. If you truly care about the services government provides, we need to develop some 21st century delivery approaches. Sticking with no longer workable approaches and practices from the 1960's and '70's will only guarantee that the whole system will collapse just that much sooner.
Updated: Victor Davis Hanson on the CA Prisoners
Victor Davis Hanson reports from the scene of California's decline, fall and collapse.
Mark Steyn builds on Victor's work, pointing out some international parallels.
Mark Steyn builds on Victor's work, pointing out some international parallels.
Budget Debate, Part 6, More spending is not sustainable
In a previous post I document how Minnesota closed the income gap with the rest of America in the years before the "Minnesota Miracle" of 1971. In more recent decades, the state has continued to improve its position, relative to the rest of the country, but at a lesser rate than pre-1970. Actually looking at the data suggests that the big "investment" in state government spending did not accelerate economic growth.
Instead, the growth had already happened, and the 1971 sea change is more accurately described as a collective decision to spend more of our new-found wealth on government, rather than having government spending as a vehicle for creating more wealth.
Digging deeper, in this post I document the relationship between state government spending (represented by the "General Fund") and state personal income. The following table shows, year-by-year, the percentage of state personal income taken up by state government general fund spending.
The the early 1960's, we were spending about 3.5% of state personal income on state government. By the end of the decade, that had jumped up to more than 5 percent. With the "Miracle" of 1971 through the early 1980's, that share accelerated past 9 percent, clearly overshooting the mark. For the past 25 years, we have scaled back spending, relative to the size of the economy, and have held steady between 7 and 8 percent of income. Last year marks the first year since 1970 that state general fund spending fell below 6.5%.
What is at stake in the current budget debate is this question, "What is the proper/sustainable size of state government, relative to the overall economy"? What the Governor proposes is to return state government to the unsustainable levels of the late 70's and early 80's. The Republicans in the state legislature are trying to hold the line.
Instead, the growth had already happened, and the 1971 sea change is more accurately described as a collective decision to spend more of our new-found wealth on government, rather than having government spending as a vehicle for creating more wealth.
Digging deeper, in this post I document the relationship between state government spending (represented by the "General Fund") and state personal income. The following table shows, year-by-year, the percentage of state personal income taken up by state government general fund spending.
| Year | % |
| 1960 | 3.4% |
| 1961 | 3.6% |
| 1962 | 3.7% |
| 1963 | 3.9% |
| 1964 | 4.2% |
| 1965 | 4.0% |
| 1966 | 4.3% |
| 1967 | 4.3% |
| 1968 | 5.4% |
| 1969 | 5.1% |
| 1970 | 6.3% |
| 1971 | 6.5% |
| 1972 | 7.4% |
| 1973 | 7.2% |
| 1974 | 7.3% |
| 1975 | 7.6% |
| 1976 | 8.5% |
| 1977 | 8.9% |
| 1978 | 8.8% |
| 1979 | 8.6% |
| 1980 | 8.5% |
| 1981 | 7.8% |
| 1982 | 9.1% |
| 1983 | 7.1% |
| 1984 | 8.0% |
| 1985 | 8.0% |
| 1986 | 7.5% |
| 1987 | 7.5% |
| 1988 | 7.4% |
| 1989 | 7.4% |
| 1990 | 7.7% |
| 1991 | 7.8% |
| 1992 | 7.5% |
| 1993 | 7.4% |
| 1994 | 7.7% |
| 1995 | 7.6% |
| 1996 | 7.4% |
| 1997 | 7.4% |
| 1998 | 7.2% |
| 1999 | 7.4% |
| 2000 | 7.1% |
| 2001 | 7.6% |
| 2002 | 7.5% |
| 2003 | 7.8% |
| 2004 | 7.2% |
| 2005 | 7.5% |
| 2006 | 7.6% |
| 2007 | 7.4% |
| 2008 | 7.5% |
| 2009 | 7.6% |
| 2010 | 6.4% |
The the early 1960's, we were spending about 3.5% of state personal income on state government. By the end of the decade, that had jumped up to more than 5 percent. With the "Miracle" of 1971 through the early 1980's, that share accelerated past 9 percent, clearly overshooting the mark. For the past 25 years, we have scaled back spending, relative to the size of the economy, and have held steady between 7 and 8 percent of income. Last year marks the first year since 1970 that state general fund spending fell below 6.5%.
What is at stake in the current budget debate is this question, "What is the proper/sustainable size of state government, relative to the overall economy"? What the Governor proposes is to return state government to the unsustainable levels of the late 70's and early 80's. The Republicans in the state legislature are trying to hold the line.
Video of my Tea Party Speech Posted
The video of my speech to the SW Metro Tea Party is now available at their website, under the May 9th date. Enjoy!
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
(Updated and Bumped) Feed In Tariff Claims Another Victim
Last month, I posted on Consumers Power of Michigan discontinuing their generous feed-in-tariff program for solar power. Reports continue to come in from those in the solar industry hurt by ending the subsidies.
From the utility viewpoint, they ran a program, filled a quota for solar power and now they are ending the program. From the solar industry viewpoint, the subsidies must continue until some distant point in the future when they are no longer needed. The lesson here is not the start the subsidies in the first place. Once started, they are nearly impossible to end.
Consumers offered a feed-in-tariff rate of 65 cents per kWh for solar power (for twelve years), well above the market price of 5 cents for "grid" power. As day-follows-night, the world stampeded to take advantage of this well-above-market price. And now that the utility has slammed the door on new applicants, those that missed out on the windfall are crying foul.
From the utility viewpoint, they ran a program, filled a quota for solar power and now they are ending the program. From the solar industry viewpoint, the subsidies must continue until some distant point in the future when they are no longer needed. The lesson here is not the start the subsidies in the first place. Once started, they are nearly impossible to end.
Consumers offered a feed-in-tariff rate of 65 cents per kWh for solar power (for twelve years), well above the market price of 5 cents for "grid" power. As day-follows-night, the world stampeded to take advantage of this well-above-market price. And now that the utility has slammed the door on new applicants, those that missed out on the windfall are crying foul.
(Updated and Bumped) Al Gore Writes to Minnesota on Coal Power
In Minnesota, the state legislature is debating whether to overturn a ban on new coal-fired power plants. Al Gore--former Vice President, Nobel Prize-winner, Oscar-winner, and inventor of the Internet--wrote a letter to Minnesota, pleading to keep the ban on coal power. The bill is numbered House File (HF) 72.
As Mr. Gore writes,
"A vote against HF72 is a vote for the future of the planet".
Update: On Sunday, Mr. Gore delivered the graduation speech at Hamilton College in upstate New York. One day after the world failed to end on schedule, Mr. Gore said the following,
“(The climate crisis) is a challenge that, in my opinion, is the most serious challenge that our civilization has ever faced.”
As Mr. Gore writes,
"A vote against HF72 is a vote for the future of the planet".
Update: On Sunday, Mr. Gore delivered the graduation speech at Hamilton College in upstate New York. One day after the world failed to end on schedule, Mr. Gore said the following,
“(The climate crisis) is a challenge that, in my opinion, is the most serious challenge that our civilization has ever faced.”
(Updated and Bumped) Another apocalypse that hasn't happened yet
Update: Radio host Dennis Praeger weighs in on the apocalypse that wasn't in this column.
Claire Hope Cummings notes on Grist that the Rapture did not occur yesterday. She takes advantage of this teachable moment to advise the environmental movement away from their use of similar tactics on the question of global warming.
Ms. Cummings writes,
"In the light of a long history of failed doomsday forecasts, I think we need to find a more sympathetic and less cataclysmic way to capture the public's attention."
(H/T to the Cleantechczar)
Claire Hope Cummings notes on Grist that the Rapture did not occur yesterday. She takes advantage of this teachable moment to advise the environmental movement away from their use of similar tactics on the question of global warming.
Ms. Cummings writes,
"In the light of a long history of failed doomsday forecasts, I think we need to find a more sympathetic and less cataclysmic way to capture the public's attention."
(H/T to the Cleantechczar)
Monday, May 23, 2011
File Under: Worst Nightmares Realized
MinnPost reports that our newly appointed regional government, the Metropolitan Council, is looking to be more activist in the areas of transit, land use, and development.
Can Electric Transmission Towers Be Less Ugly?
I once spoke at an architects' conference and made that suggestion. What I got in return was a nasty letter saying that it was not their job to be "exterior decorators".
Still, I can't help but think that less ugly towers would reduce the opposition to new lines, as this BBC news item suggests. The last time I was in Florida, I saw a Mickey Mouse-shaped tower near Orlando.
An Icelandic vision, from the BBC story linked above.
Still, I can't help but think that less ugly towers would reduce the opposition to new lines, as this BBC news item suggests. The last time I was in Florida, I saw a Mickey Mouse-shaped tower near Orlando.
Signs of Life for Magna Carta in IN?
Heartened to see this report that the Indiana Attorney General may seek reconsideration of that state's supreme court decision overturning 800 years of English common law. Hope the AG tries and succeeds.
Meanwhile, I'm reading a book on the history of Magna Carta and concluding that now is the time to readopt the document as law.
Meanwhile, I'm reading a book on the history of Magna Carta and concluding that now is the time to readopt the document as law.
Sunday, May 22, 2011
The Budget Debate, Part 5
The Star Tribune's Lori Sturdevant writes about the Budget Debate in today's paper. Not surprisingly, she sides with the Governor.
What is surprising is how she frames the issue as Jefferson vs. Hamilton, as town-hall democracy vs. aristocracy. Unfortunately, she gets who is on which team exactly backwards. And after invoking Jefferson and town meetings, she spends the remainder of her column faithfully transcribing the Governor's talking points about tax fairness, etc.
By all means, let's frame the debate in terms of bottom up democracy vs. top down aristocracy: but let us reconsider who is the aristocrat seeking to impose his noblesse oblige on us poor hapless taxpayers.
What is surprising is how she frames the issue as Jefferson vs. Hamilton, as town-hall democracy vs. aristocracy. Unfortunately, she gets who is on which team exactly backwards. And after invoking Jefferson and town meetings, she spends the remainder of her column faithfully transcribing the Governor's talking points about tax fairness, etc.
By all means, let's frame the debate in terms of bottom up democracy vs. top down aristocracy: but let us reconsider who is the aristocrat seeking to impose his noblesse oblige on us poor hapless taxpayers.
Saturday, May 21, 2011
The Unfinished Revolution: Leaving it too late?
In these dark days for the budget debate, Craig Westover draws attention to this column on True North, done immediately after the last election. A bracing account of what lays ahead of us.
"Make no little plans."--Daniel Burnham.
"Make no little plans."--Daniel Burnham.
Friday, May 20, 2011
Google to Censor Climate Critics?
If you're not reading this, it's because Google won't let you. The Daily Caller reports that the folks at Yale think Google censorship of climate critics is a good idea. Too much information will destroy the planet, or something.
Update: Follow the Money, Media and RE-AMP
Update: a loyal reader points out that Reuters, the international wire-news service, reprints the same article as news. Reuters picked up the piece from Solve Climate News.
This morning, the Star Tribune reprinted an article from Midwest Energy News' Dan Haugen on the cost of renewable energy. The Star Tribune reprinted the article in its Business section, and nothing about its appearance would lead the reader to conclude the piece was anything other than a straight-ahead news item.
In fact, Midwest Energy News is a product of the advocacy group Fresh Energy and RE-AMP, an advocacy coalition funded by a consortium of foundations, including the Garfield Foundation.
There is nothing wrong, inherently, with advocacy journalism. It just should be labeled as such.
This morning, the Star Tribune reprinted an article from Midwest Energy News' Dan Haugen on the cost of renewable energy. The Star Tribune reprinted the article in its Business section, and nothing about its appearance would lead the reader to conclude the piece was anything other than a straight-ahead news item.
In fact, Midwest Energy News is a product of the advocacy group Fresh Energy and RE-AMP, an advocacy coalition funded by a consortium of foundations, including the Garfield Foundation.
There is nothing wrong, inherently, with advocacy journalism. It just should be labeled as such.
Follow the Money: the Garfield Foundation (Bumped)
The Garfield Foundation of Massachusetts holds in trust the fortune of a 19th century Russian immigrant and his successful businessmen descendants. As with all of these origin stories, the Garfield's is rich with irony. The family company made soda chargers, small metal cylinders of compressed CO2, for making seltzer water. Now, of course, this fortune built on CO2 is dedicated to the elimination of CO2.
The Garfield Foundation, following an unknown motivation, has chosen to be active in Minnesota and the Midwest, promoting global warming policies, which I document in this Google doc.
Although the Google doc is laid out in reverse-chronological order, I assembled the data in chronological order. It was interesting to see how the group's giving has evolved since 2005, which has relevance for current policy debates.
In 2005 and 2006, the Garfield Foundation was active in funding efforts to stop new coal-fired power plants, specifically the Big Stone II plant, proposed for eastern South Dakota. In more recent years, the Foundation has shifted its giving to efforts directed at shutting down existing coal-fired power plants, which our region relies upon for critical, baseload power.
When it was fashionable, in 2007 and 2008, the Garfield Foundation supported the work of the Midwest Governors Association and the Minnesota Climate Change Advisory Group, who worked to promote cap and trade policies. But everything old becomes new again: persistent rumors have the new Administration in St. Paul reviving the Minnesota Group to make another charge at cap and trade.
From 2005 to the present, the Garfield Foundation has given millions of dollars to develop and operate RE-AMP, the body coordinating non-profit and foundation efforts to promote climate change policy in the Midwest. RE-AMP claims credit for killing the Big Stone II project, and implementing new energy efficiency, building code, and utility rate decoupling (inverted block rate) laws in Minnesota.
The Garfield Foundation, following an unknown motivation, has chosen to be active in Minnesota and the Midwest, promoting global warming policies, which I document in this Google doc.
Although the Google doc is laid out in reverse-chronological order, I assembled the data in chronological order. It was interesting to see how the group's giving has evolved since 2005, which has relevance for current policy debates.
In 2005 and 2006, the Garfield Foundation was active in funding efforts to stop new coal-fired power plants, specifically the Big Stone II plant, proposed for eastern South Dakota. In more recent years, the Foundation has shifted its giving to efforts directed at shutting down existing coal-fired power plants, which our region relies upon for critical, baseload power.
When it was fashionable, in 2007 and 2008, the Garfield Foundation supported the work of the Midwest Governors Association and the Minnesota Climate Change Advisory Group, who worked to promote cap and trade policies. But everything old becomes new again: persistent rumors have the new Administration in St. Paul reviving the Minnesota Group to make another charge at cap and trade.
From 2005 to the present, the Garfield Foundation has given millions of dollars to develop and operate RE-AMP, the body coordinating non-profit and foundation efforts to promote climate change policy in the Midwest. RE-AMP claims credit for killing the Big Stone II project, and implementing new energy efficiency, building code, and utility rate decoupling (inverted block rate) laws in Minnesota.
Fighting Carbon Taxes in Australia
The Herald Sun of Melbourne speaks truth to power in fighting Australia's carbon tax law.
Ed Driscoll Posts the Quote of the Day
Ed Driscoll posts his quote of the day from a Down Under website commenter,
“Once a society reaches the point where common courtesy must be legislated, they’ve really just about admitted that they’ve failed.”
(Via Mark Steyn on the National Review Corner blog, Tim Blair)
“Once a society reaches the point where common courtesy must be legislated, they’ve really just about admitted that they’ve failed.”
(Via Mark Steyn on the National Review Corner blog, Tim Blair)
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
The Budget Debate, Part 4, Economic Growth Pre-dates the "Miracle"
The Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) of the U.S. Dept. of Commerce harbors a treasure trove of useful data on the nation's economy.
For example, Minnesota ranks 14th among states as measured by per capita gross domestic product (GDP), a standard measure of income. It is an impressive performance for a small, cold state.
Many attribute this better-than-average economic performance to the "Minnesota Miracle" of 1971, when the state legislature dramatically increased taxes to reduce the disparity on education spending across different localities. The theory goes that this increased spending on education resulted in greater human capital, which in turn drove the economy of the next few decades.
Unfortunately, this narrative suffers from confusing correlation with causation.
Looking at BEA data, I chart the ratio of Minnesota per capita GDP to overall U.S. per capita GDP over the decades:
Year Ratio Minnesota/U.S Per Capital GDP.
2010 105.6%
2000 107.5
1990 101.8
1980 101.4
1970 99.2
1960 94.5
1950 94.9
1940 87.5
1930 88.2
Perhaps what is most remarkable about the above data, is how far behind Minnesota was relative to the rest of the country back in the 1930's and 1940's. The gap closed dramatically after the War, so that by 1970, Minnesota had caught up on income (>99%) with the national as a whole. Much less dramatic has been the inching ahead since the 1970's. Looking at the data, whatever caused Minnesota to emerge from being cold and poor to cold and relatively well-off, predates the "Miracle" by decades.
It would be more accurate to describe what happened in 1971 as a collective decision by Minnesotans to use their newly-earned wealth to pay for more government and not a case of government spending creating wealth. So to those who advocate a "New Minnesota Miracle" as a route out of our current crisis, I suggest reviewing the economic history of our state.
For example, Minnesota ranks 14th among states as measured by per capita gross domestic product (GDP), a standard measure of income. It is an impressive performance for a small, cold state.
Many attribute this better-than-average economic performance to the "Minnesota Miracle" of 1971, when the state legislature dramatically increased taxes to reduce the disparity on education spending across different localities. The theory goes that this increased spending on education resulted in greater human capital, which in turn drove the economy of the next few decades.
Unfortunately, this narrative suffers from confusing correlation with causation.
Looking at BEA data, I chart the ratio of Minnesota per capita GDP to overall U.S. per capita GDP over the decades:
Year Ratio Minnesota/U.S Per Capital GDP.
2010 105.6%
2000 107.5
1990 101.8
1980 101.4
1970 99.2
1960 94.5
1950 94.9
1940 87.5
1930 88.2
Perhaps what is most remarkable about the above data, is how far behind Minnesota was relative to the rest of the country back in the 1930's and 1940's. The gap closed dramatically after the War, so that by 1970, Minnesota had caught up on income (>99%) with the national as a whole. Much less dramatic has been the inching ahead since the 1970's. Looking at the data, whatever caused Minnesota to emerge from being cold and poor to cold and relatively well-off, predates the "Miracle" by decades.
It would be more accurate to describe what happened in 1971 as a collective decision by Minnesotans to use their newly-earned wealth to pay for more government and not a case of government spending creating wealth. So to those who advocate a "New Minnesota Miracle" as a route out of our current crisis, I suggest reviewing the economic history of our state.
The Budget Debate, Part 3
Continuing my thread on Minnesota's budget crisis, and the debate on tax fairness.
Gov. Dayton's obsession with the tax incidence study strikes me as odd. He emphasizes the combined state and local tax burden, where the average household paid, in 2008, 11.5 percent of total income in total state income, sales, and state and local property taxes. The top 5 percent of households, by income, paid 9.7 percent of total income in state and local taxes. As I discuss in Part 2, by logic, this disparity arises because of the higher savings rates of higher-income households.
However, the Governor and the state legislature only control state-level taxes. On this score the disparity actually goes the other direction between the average household and the top 5 percent household, 8.2 vs. 8.8 percent. The entirety of the disparity comes from local taxes, where the difference in effective rates is 3.3 percent vs. 0.9 percent. So the Governor is trying to adjust for the collective decisions of local taxing authorities, over which he has no direct control, by increasing the progressivity of an already progressive state tax structure.
Unfortunately, he does not take into account Federal taxes. With the highly progressive structure of the Federal tax system, no question of fairness could be raised.
Timothy Taylor makes both of these points in his Star Tribune column this morning.
Gov. Dayton's obsession with the tax incidence study strikes me as odd. He emphasizes the combined state and local tax burden, where the average household paid, in 2008, 11.5 percent of total income in total state income, sales, and state and local property taxes. The top 5 percent of households, by income, paid 9.7 percent of total income in state and local taxes. As I discuss in Part 2, by logic, this disparity arises because of the higher savings rates of higher-income households.
However, the Governor and the state legislature only control state-level taxes. On this score the disparity actually goes the other direction between the average household and the top 5 percent household, 8.2 vs. 8.8 percent. The entirety of the disparity comes from local taxes, where the difference in effective rates is 3.3 percent vs. 0.9 percent. So the Governor is trying to adjust for the collective decisions of local taxing authorities, over which he has no direct control, by increasing the progressivity of an already progressive state tax structure.
Unfortunately, he does not take into account Federal taxes. With the highly progressive structure of the Federal tax system, no question of fairness could be raised.
Timothy Taylor makes both of these points in his Star Tribune column this morning.
The Budget Debate, Part 2
Forgive the length of this post. I am trying to make some subtle points about tax policy, and I think the reading will pay off, in the end.
Our state legislature has less than a week to go before it must adjourn for the year. In today's Star Tribune, Timothy Taylor writes an opinion piece on the central question of the budget debate: should we raise taxes on "the rich"?
I don't think it is unfair to say that Mark Dayton made raising taxes on "the rich" the signature issue of his 2010 campaign for Governor. (I am using scare quotes around "the rich" because the actual definition keeps fluctuating.) In turn, Gov. Dayton rested his argument for higher tax rates on the Department of Revenue's Tax Incidence Study (the 2011 version is located here). The study shows (Table 4-2) that--after combining state income taxes, property taxes, and sales taxes--the percentage of income paid in taxes falls as income rises. Gov. Dayton finds this outrageous, that higher income taxpayers don't contribute their "fair share" as a percentage of their income.
His solution is to raise income taxes to the highest/nearly the highest levels in the country. But a close look at Table 4-2 indicates that income taxes are not the source of the disparity. Minnesota has a highly progressive income tax rate structure, and does not have lower rates for capital gains and dividend income, as is the case with the Federal income tax structure.
No, the disparity arises when you add in sales and property taxes. Sales taxes are a flat percentage of the sales price, regardless of your income. A low-income person buying a gallon of gasoline pays the same tax, in cents, that a rich person pays per gallon, even if the gasoline is going into the tank of a Bentley. However, low income households spend a greater percentage of their total incomes, hence they pay a larger percentage of their incomes in sales tax. Putting it another way, higher income households save more of their income and, thus, do not consume stuff at as high a proportion of their income as do lower-income households.
Property taxes, for the most part, vary with the value of the property taxed. Higher priced homes will pay proportionately higher taxes. However, as with the sales tax, higher income households do not consume housing in the same proportion as lower income households. Thus, lower income households pay a greater percentage of their income in property taxes. The rich simply do not have homes as big as their incomes could support.
In the end, what drives this "disparity" in effective tax rates is not that rates on "the rich" are too low, but that higher income households save too much. If higher income households would buy larger homes and spend more money on stuff, then the disparity would disappear.
So, in the end, what Gov. Dayton hopes to accomplish is to punish the relative thriftiness of higher income households. He wants to tax them more so that they can save and invest less. How will this policy create more private sector jobs?
Our state legislature has less than a week to go before it must adjourn for the year. In today's Star Tribune, Timothy Taylor writes an opinion piece on the central question of the budget debate: should we raise taxes on "the rich"?
I don't think it is unfair to say that Mark Dayton made raising taxes on "the rich" the signature issue of his 2010 campaign for Governor. (I am using scare quotes around "the rich" because the actual definition keeps fluctuating.) In turn, Gov. Dayton rested his argument for higher tax rates on the Department of Revenue's Tax Incidence Study (the 2011 version is located here). The study shows (Table 4-2) that--after combining state income taxes, property taxes, and sales taxes--the percentage of income paid in taxes falls as income rises. Gov. Dayton finds this outrageous, that higher income taxpayers don't contribute their "fair share" as a percentage of their income.
His solution is to raise income taxes to the highest/nearly the highest levels in the country. But a close look at Table 4-2 indicates that income taxes are not the source of the disparity. Minnesota has a highly progressive income tax rate structure, and does not have lower rates for capital gains and dividend income, as is the case with the Federal income tax structure.
No, the disparity arises when you add in sales and property taxes. Sales taxes are a flat percentage of the sales price, regardless of your income. A low-income person buying a gallon of gasoline pays the same tax, in cents, that a rich person pays per gallon, even if the gasoline is going into the tank of a Bentley. However, low income households spend a greater percentage of their total incomes, hence they pay a larger percentage of their incomes in sales tax. Putting it another way, higher income households save more of their income and, thus, do not consume stuff at as high a proportion of their income as do lower-income households.
Property taxes, for the most part, vary with the value of the property taxed. Higher priced homes will pay proportionately higher taxes. However, as with the sales tax, higher income households do not consume housing in the same proportion as lower income households. Thus, lower income households pay a greater percentage of their income in property taxes. The rich simply do not have homes as big as their incomes could support.
In the end, what drives this "disparity" in effective tax rates is not that rates on "the rich" are too low, but that higher income households save too much. If higher income households would buy larger homes and spend more money on stuff, then the disparity would disappear.
So, in the end, what Gov. Dayton hopes to accomplish is to punish the relative thriftiness of higher income households. He wants to tax them more so that they can save and invest less. How will this policy create more private sector jobs?
The Budget Debate, Part 1 (Bumped)
Like most states, Minnesota's state government has a budget deficit. Our newly elected governor and state legislature are struggling to close the gap. The debate centers on the question of whether we should find a way to live with whatever revenue comes in under the current tax code ("living within our means") or whether we should raise tax rates (especially on "the wealthy") to generate more revenue.
Professor Marie Failinger, of Hamline University, writes in a Sunday Star Tribune opinion piece about the budget debate, objecting to the "within our means" analogy. She writes,
"Let's think about what a real family would really do, confronted with diminishing income and rising costs, the situation the state now faces."
She continues,
"The first, not last, thing the family would do is to try to augment its income, finding another job or figuring out a way to use their talents to earn more."
I find this thought process both extraordinary and very revealing: the idea that someone could equate the government's raising taxes with a family member getting a second job to support the household.
Keep in mind that, during the debate, no one has suggested that state employees would work more hours in exchange for the additional tax revenue. So the analogy doesn't work at the most basic level. Getting a second job requires sacrifice on the part of the worker: they are giving something up (their time and effort) in exchange for additional compensation. A second job requires a voluntary exchange between a willing worker and a willing employer.
In the case of the government raising tax rates, there is no voluntary exchange. Don't pay the higher rates, and government will use its coercive police powers to ensure that you do. In the case of increased tax rates, there is no sacrifice on the part of government, it simply collects more money without providing any additional effort or results.
No, the correct analogy is closer to a worker demanding a higher wage at the first job, simply because the worker wants more money. Now the employer may grant the request, refuse the request, or fire the worker. There can be no coercion.
Professor Marie Failinger, of Hamline University, writes in a Sunday Star Tribune opinion piece about the budget debate, objecting to the "within our means" analogy. She writes,
"Let's think about what a real family would really do, confronted with diminishing income and rising costs, the situation the state now faces."
She continues,
"The first, not last, thing the family would do is to try to augment its income, finding another job or figuring out a way to use their talents to earn more."
I find this thought process both extraordinary and very revealing: the idea that someone could equate the government's raising taxes with a family member getting a second job to support the household.
Keep in mind that, during the debate, no one has suggested that state employees would work more hours in exchange for the additional tax revenue. So the analogy doesn't work at the most basic level. Getting a second job requires sacrifice on the part of the worker: they are giving something up (their time and effort) in exchange for additional compensation. A second job requires a voluntary exchange between a willing worker and a willing employer.
In the case of the government raising tax rates, there is no voluntary exchange. Don't pay the higher rates, and government will use its coercive police powers to ensure that you do. In the case of increased tax rates, there is no sacrifice on the part of government, it simply collects more money without providing any additional effort or results.
No, the correct analogy is closer to a worker demanding a higher wage at the first job, simply because the worker wants more money. Now the employer may grant the request, refuse the request, or fire the worker. There can be no coercion.
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Solving the Problem From the Bottom Up
A good counterpoint to the Don Shelby worldview discussed below is this book review by David Roberts in The American Prospect. Mr. Roberts reviews David G. Victor's book Global Warming Gridlock: Creating More Effective Strategies for Protecting the Planet.
Writes Roberts,
"After 20 years, it may be time to admit that the climate movement's fundamental strategy, not a deficit of personal courage or heroic striving, is behind the lack of progress. If the movement is to rise to its historic challenge, it will have to do so by working with nation-states as they actually exist."
Roberts' review makes clear that it's the top-down approach of the international process that is to blame,
"This top-down strategy is seductive, which is why it's been central to international climate negotiations since the signing of the Rio Declaration in 1992. But as a practical matter, it's not working."
The problem is not that politicians, Republican or otherwise, are too stupid. The problem is not a lack of will power. The problem has been, all along, that we are attacking the problem from the wrong end.
Roberts also makes a good point about climate adaptation (which touches on the resiliance/black swan theme I have been developing),
"The economic and institutional reforms that yield development and resilience tend to arise from inside a country, not outside."
(Via Planet Gore and Grist)
Writes Roberts,
"After 20 years, it may be time to admit that the climate movement's fundamental strategy, not a deficit of personal courage or heroic striving, is behind the lack of progress. If the movement is to rise to its historic challenge, it will have to do so by working with nation-states as they actually exist."
Roberts' review makes clear that it's the top-down approach of the international process that is to blame,
"This top-down strategy is seductive, which is why it's been central to international climate negotiations since the signing of the Rio Declaration in 1992. But as a practical matter, it's not working."
The problem is not that politicians, Republican or otherwise, are too stupid. The problem is not a lack of will power. The problem has been, all along, that we are attacking the problem from the wrong end.
Roberts also makes a good point about climate adaptation (which touches on the resiliance/black swan theme I have been developing),
"The economic and institutional reforms that yield development and resilience tend to arise from inside a country, not outside."
(Via Planet Gore and Grist)
EPA Delays New Rules on Boiler Emissions
The LA Times reports on the delay by the EPA of new rules on industrial boiler emissions that were issued back in March.
You're Too Stupid to Know You Are Stupid
That's what TV's Don Shelby tells me in today's MinnPost. Actually what he said was,
"Cornell University conducted a research project last year and found that some people are so stupid they don't even know they are stupid."
Since Cornell is ranked 15th in the nation, and my alma mater is ranked only 25th, I guess I will have to accept their verdict.
"Cornell University conducted a research project last year and found that some people are so stupid they don't even know they are stupid."
Since Cornell is ranked 15th in the nation, and my alma mater is ranked only 25th, I guess I will have to accept their verdict.
Do Wind Mandates Drive Up Electricity Prices?
That is the question asked by a piece on the Midwest Energy News site. Dan Haugen covers a number of different viewpoints including the study put out by our friends at the Minnesota Free Market Institute.
MFMI's take on the Haugen article: http://mnfmi.org/2011/05/17/calculating-the-costs-of-the-windmill-mandate/
MFMI's take on the Haugen article: http://mnfmi.org/2011/05/17/calculating-the-costs-of-the-windmill-mandate/
Do We Need a Word for What Follows "Trillion"?
Mark Steyn suggests "abyss" in his newest "Happy Warrior" column for National Review.
Monday, May 16, 2011
Change From the Bottom Up
I'm working to produce bottom-up change through our existing political process. But here is a guy looking to technology as a source of bottom-up change.
(Via InstaPundit)
(Via InstaPundit)
Saturday, May 14, 2011
Human Capital Bonds Discussed Again
...in today's Star Tribune. The idea introduced by my local legislator, state Representative Keith Downey (R-Edina) continues to make its way to the Governor's desk.
Sorry to see my old Pawlenty Administration colleague Jim Schowalter with this not-getting-the-idea quote,
"Selling bonds would cost more than a direct appropriation."
Jim, it's about leveraging the back-end savings, not minimizing the upfront costs. Just throwing money at a budget item will always be cheaper than real reform.
Sorry to see my old Pawlenty Administration colleague Jim Schowalter with this not-getting-the-idea quote,
"Selling bonds would cost more than a direct appropriation."
Jim, it's about leveraging the back-end savings, not minimizing the upfront costs. Just throwing money at a budget item will always be cheaper than real reform.
Steyn: Moving Beyond Decline to Collapse
Mark Steyn's latest syndicated column surveys the 2012 election landscape for clues as to who may able to cope with the present crisis. In the course of doing so, he makes this obvious point on the current debate regarding the federal debt ceiling,
"In the real world, debt ceilings are determined by the lenders, not the borrower."
"In the real world, debt ceilings are determined by the lenders, not the borrower."
Smart Grid Event at U-MN, May 18-19 (Bumped)
Next week I will be attending a Smart Grid event at the University of Minnesota. The "Smart Grid Cyber Security Conference" will be held on campus on May 18 and 19. I urge all who are interested to attend: it's free! (but space is limited, so pre-register). And best of all: Dr. Massoud Amin is speaking on May 19.
Friday, May 13, 2011
Mead Agrees With Krugman (Partially): Time/Space Torn
In his latest post, Walter Russell Mead expresses partial agreement with Paul Krugman that America's elites are out-of-touch. As always, I take Mead's side as he catalogs the moral and intellectual rot at the heart of our elite establishment.
Mead writes,
"American elites are genuinely and sincerely convinced that the American masses don’t understand the world, don’t realize that American exceptionalism is a mental disease, want infinite government benefits while paying zero tax, and cling to their Bibles and their guns despite all the peer reviewed social science literature that demonstrates the danger and the worthlessness of both."
It's a long piece, as usual, but it marks another important essay in the case Professor Mead is making for Rebuilding from the Bottom Up.
Mead writes,
"American elites are genuinely and sincerely convinced that the American masses don’t understand the world, don’t realize that American exceptionalism is a mental disease, want infinite government benefits while paying zero tax, and cling to their Bibles and their guns despite all the peer reviewed social science literature that demonstrates the danger and the worthlessness of both."
It's a long piece, as usual, but it marks another important essay in the case Professor Mead is making for Rebuilding from the Bottom Up.
Undernews: Denmark Closes Borders
Add the Kingdom of Denmark to the list of EU nations re-instituting border controls, according to this report. Denmark is now monitoring its borders with both Germany and Sweden.
(Via Drudge)
(Via Drudge)
Whither the Green Movement?
On Power Line, Steven Hayward takes note of GE's apparent back peddling on their commitment to the green movement. In his post, he includes this picture:
...which also serves as the cover photo on the home page for the website Charter Cities.org. Charter Cities makes the point that the photo shows students studying by streetlight, because local rules make electricity unaffordable/unavailable at home. It simultaneously illustrates the consequences of misguided government policy, while showing the universal desire of people to better their condition.
Steven takes recent comments by GE's Immelt as a hopeful sign that some sanity may return to the energy debate. He cites both Walter Russell Mead and George Monbiot, whom I discussed earlier. I hope so.
But every time I see that photo I wonder the following: if American energy policy causes prices to necessarily skyrocket or imposes rolling blackouts because we have shut down too many power plants, will our children be motivated enough to go out in the street and study by streetlight?
P.S. Here is the original story on the above photo from the BBC back in 2007. It's worth reading for the lesson on what happens to a society that loses access to affordable, reliable energy. (The students in the story are in Guinea in Africa, not in Indonesia.)
Steven takes recent comments by GE's Immelt as a hopeful sign that some sanity may return to the energy debate. He cites both Walter Russell Mead and George Monbiot, whom I discussed earlier. I hope so.
But every time I see that photo I wonder the following: if American energy policy causes prices to necessarily skyrocket or imposes rolling blackouts because we have shut down too many power plants, will our children be motivated enough to go out in the street and study by streetlight?
P.S. Here is the original story on the above photo from the BBC back in 2007. It's worth reading for the lesson on what happens to a society that loses access to affordable, reliable energy. (The students in the story are in Guinea in Africa, not in Indonesia.)
Magna Carta Now Dead
Well, 800 years is a long run for anyone. Overturning common law dating back to Magna Carta in 1215, the Indiana State Supreme Court has ruled that citizens have no right to resist illegal entry by police. Please turn out the lights on your way out.
Perhaps now is the time, as was done in centuries past, to reissue Magna Carta as law.
See the commentary on The Volokh Conspiracy.
Michael Walsh comments in National Review Online's Corner.
Love this quote from William Pitt,
"The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail; its roof may shake; the wind may blow through it; the storm may enter; the rain may enter; but the King of England cannot enter – all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement!"
Perhaps now is the time, as was done in centuries past, to reissue Magna Carta as law.
See the commentary on The Volokh Conspiracy.
Michael Walsh comments in National Review Online's Corner.
Love this quote from William Pitt,
"The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail; its roof may shake; the wind may blow through it; the storm may enter; the rain may enter; but the King of England cannot enter – all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement!"
My Latest Legislative Update
...is now available at the Free Market Institute website. It was a busy week at the state legislature for energy.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
MN House Votes to Overturn Coal Power Ban
Congratulations to state Representative Mike Beard and his House colleagues for voting today to overturn Minnesota's ban on importing coal power. The bill passed on a bipartisan 76-54 vote. The House version is narrower than the Senate's and will need to be reconciled.
Media Coverage:
St. Paul Pioneer Press
Duluth News Tribune
Bismarck Tribune (AP)
Minnesota House Session Daily
Media Coverage:
St. Paul Pioneer Press
Duluth News Tribune
Bismarck Tribune (AP)
Minnesota House Session Daily
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Ontario Conservatives Vow to Scrap Feed-in-Tariff
Reuters reports that Ontario's Conservative party is pledging to scrap the province's "feed-in-tariff" scheme if they win in the upcoming election. The Conservatives are now the opposition party, and will end the program that has cost the province billions of dollars.
Monday, May 9, 2011
Thanks to all who came out to Chanhassen
For tonight's SW Metro Tea Party event. People have a lot of options on how to spend a Monday night. For those who think they know all about "those tea party types", I suggest attending a meeting. Week after week, good people who are trying to be part of the solution assemble to work with their neighbors on making Minnesota a better place.
Social Engineering at Work: Water Rates
The Pioneer Press reports on water rates in east metro communities. Note the prevalence of the inverted block rate structure, which is far more common with water utilities than with natural gas.
What I found most interesting about the article was the unashamed social engineering at work: we hate business, we love business, we hate irrigation, we hate "big" users. What happened to just running a utility and charging the cost of service?
What I found most interesting about the article was the unashamed social engineering at work: we hate business, we love business, we hate irrigation, we hate "big" users. What happened to just running a utility and charging the cost of service?
Sunday, May 8, 2011
California as Sociological Experiment Gone Wrong
Or is that redundant? Victor Davis Hanson chronicling the implosion of California over at Pajamas Media.
Professor Hanson saves the best for last, in the penultimate paragraph,
"History’s revolutions and upheavals — whether the Nika rioting in Constantinople, the periodic uprising of the turba in Rome, the French upheavals, or the Bolshevik Revolution — are rarely fueled by the starving and despised, but by the subsidized and frustrated, who either see their umbilical cord threatened, or their comfort and subsidies static rather than expansive — or their own condition surpassed by that of an envied kulak class. Perceived relative inequality rather than absolute poverty is the engine of revolution."
Professor Hanson saves the best for last, in the penultimate paragraph,
"History’s revolutions and upheavals — whether the Nika rioting in Constantinople, the periodic uprising of the turba in Rome, the French upheavals, or the Bolshevik Revolution — are rarely fueled by the starving and despised, but by the subsidized and frustrated, who either see their umbilical cord threatened, or their comfort and subsidies static rather than expansive — or their own condition surpassed by that of an envied kulak class. Perceived relative inequality rather than absolute poverty is the engine of revolution."
Friday, May 6, 2011
Thomas Jefferson's "Unfinished Revolution"
In my visit last month to the great Commonwealth of Virginia, I had the opportunity to visit two historic sites: Thomas Jefferson's Poplar Forest and Appomattox Court House, the site of Robert E. Lee's surrender. As fate would have it, the two visits both touched on the theme of Jefferson's Unfinished Revolution.
Poplar Forest, near Lynchburg, was Jefferson's second home, built during his Presidency as a retreat from the crowds at Monticello, near Charlottesville. Like all of his architectural projects, by design, Poplar Forest was unfinished: a work in progress that Jefferson built and rebuilt. A planned second wing was never begun.
Appomattox Court House, of course, is where the Civil War ended in April 1865. The collection of period buildings surrounding McLean House, site of the surrender, has been turned into a National Park. (The present day town of Appomattox is located a few miles away). While in the Park's book store, I purchased April 1865: The Month That Saved America, by Jay Winik. The book discusses the climatic month of the war's end and its immediate aftermath.
Reading the book on the plane ride back to Minnesota, I was surprised and delighted to discover that the book's Prelude ("A Nation Delayed") was all about Thomas Jefferson (even mentioning Poplar Forest). The prelude focuses on the fundamental contradiction in Jefferson's life: that the man who wrote "all men are created equal" could be a life-long owner of slaves. A contradiciton that was finally resolved with the war's end.
But it was this passage that caught my eye,
"Until his dying days, [Jefferson] regularly propounded local self-government above all else, supporting states' rights against the Union, county rights against the states, township rights against the county, and private rights against all. He pushed for the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, limiting federal power in favor of the states."
That Jeffersonian vision of government from the bottom up has never been realized in this nation. The "Ward Republics" that he wanted to see established at the neighborhood level have never come to pass. Instead, what we have is top-down government, starting at the federal level, which each tier dominating the one "below" it.
I'm calling this failure to structure government from the bottom up the "unfinshed revolution" of Thomas Jefferson. The mission of this blog is to advocate for its completion.
Poplar Forest, near Lynchburg, was Jefferson's second home, built during his Presidency as a retreat from the crowds at Monticello, near Charlottesville. Like all of his architectural projects, by design, Poplar Forest was unfinished: a work in progress that Jefferson built and rebuilt. A planned second wing was never begun.
Appomattox Court House, of course, is where the Civil War ended in April 1865. The collection of period buildings surrounding McLean House, site of the surrender, has been turned into a National Park. (The present day town of Appomattox is located a few miles away). While in the Park's book store, I purchased April 1865: The Month That Saved America, by Jay Winik. The book discusses the climatic month of the war's end and its immediate aftermath.
Reading the book on the plane ride back to Minnesota, I was surprised and delighted to discover that the book's Prelude ("A Nation Delayed") was all about Thomas Jefferson (even mentioning Poplar Forest). The prelude focuses on the fundamental contradiction in Jefferson's life: that the man who wrote "all men are created equal" could be a life-long owner of slaves. A contradiciton that was finally resolved with the war's end.
But it was this passage that caught my eye,
"Until his dying days, [Jefferson] regularly propounded local self-government above all else, supporting states' rights against the Union, county rights against the states, township rights against the county, and private rights against all. He pushed for the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, limiting federal power in favor of the states."
That Jeffersonian vision of government from the bottom up has never been realized in this nation. The "Ward Republics" that he wanted to see established at the neighborhood level have never come to pass. Instead, what we have is top-down government, starting at the federal level, which each tier dominating the one "below" it.
I'm calling this failure to structure government from the bottom up the "unfinshed revolution" of Thomas Jefferson. The mission of this blog is to advocate for its completion.
Walter Russell Mead on the Green Movement
Earlier this week, Walter Russell Mead wrote on his blog about the state of the worldwide environmental movement. Mead takes as his jumping off point this piece by George Monbiot in The Guardian.
Mead strikes to the heart of the environmentalist contradiction, writing,
"Greens like to have it both ways. They warn darkly about “peak oil” and global resource shortages that will destroy our industrial economy in its tracks — but also warn that runaway economic growth will destroy the planet through the uncontrolled effects of mass industrial productions. Both doomsday scenarios cannot be true; one cannot simultaneously die of both starvation and gluttony."
Monbiot himself realizes that the movement has reached a dead end, writing at the end,
"All of us in the environment movement, in other words – whether we propose accommodation, radical downsizing or collapse – are lost. None of us yet has a convincing account of how humanity can get out of this mess. None of our chosen solutions break the atomising, planet-wrecking project. I hope that by laying out the problem I can encourage us to address it more logically, to abandon magical thinking and to recognise the contradictions we confront. But even that could be a tall order."
Good luck, George. Unfortunately, as I have cataloged on this blog in recent weeks, $millions running into $billions have been sunk into the "chosen solutions." Too may jobs and careers and reputations rest on continuing the cycle of foundation granting, lobbying, and programming around solutions that, at least Walter and George realize, will not work.
Mead strikes to the heart of the environmentalist contradiction, writing,
"Greens like to have it both ways. They warn darkly about “peak oil” and global resource shortages that will destroy our industrial economy in its tracks — but also warn that runaway economic growth will destroy the planet through the uncontrolled effects of mass industrial productions. Both doomsday scenarios cannot be true; one cannot simultaneously die of both starvation and gluttony."
Monbiot himself realizes that the movement has reached a dead end, writing at the end,
"All of us in the environment movement, in other words – whether we propose accommodation, radical downsizing or collapse – are lost. None of us yet has a convincing account of how humanity can get out of this mess. None of our chosen solutions break the atomising, planet-wrecking project. I hope that by laying out the problem I can encourage us to address it more logically, to abandon magical thinking and to recognise the contradictions we confront. But even that could be a tall order."
Good luck, George. Unfortunately, as I have cataloged on this blog in recent weeks, $millions running into $billions have been sunk into the "chosen solutions." Too may jobs and careers and reputations rest on continuing the cycle of foundation granting, lobbying, and programming around solutions that, at least Walter and George realize, will not work.
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Undernews: France Closes Border, Part 2
Catching up from last week, Daniel Hannan, MEP, writes about the closure by France of its Italian border and the implications of that act for EU unity.
Follow the Money: Kresge Foundation
In this edition of Follow the Money, we take a look at Detroit's Kresge Foundation. As shown in this Google doc, I have documented a number of recent grants to Minnesota non-profits around energy issues.
The Kresge Foundation was founded in 1924 by Detroit's Sebastian Spering Kresge, the founder of Kmart, for the “promotion of human progress.” Oops.
The Foundation is now run by Minnesota's Rip Rapson, formerly head of the McKnight Foundation of Minneapolis.
The Kresge Foundation was founded in 1924 by Detroit's Sebastian Spering Kresge, the founder of Kmart, for the “promotion of human progress.” Oops.
The Foundation is now run by Minnesota's Rip Rapson, formerly head of the McKnight Foundation of Minneapolis.
Steyn on the Sinking Ship: Passing out Thimbles
Mark Steyn writes in the "Happy Warrior" column in National Review about the national debt.
On efforts to cut the budget to date,
"But somehow cutting it is beyond the bounds of political reality. And so as the ship fills up with water we congratulate ourselves on agreeing to pass out the thimbles."
Meanwhile TaxProf writes on his blog that 51 percent of households pay no income tax. Have we finally succeeded in voting ourselves "largess from the public treasury"?
On efforts to cut the budget to date,
"But somehow cutting it is beyond the bounds of political reality. And so as the ship fills up with water we congratulate ourselves on agreeing to pass out the thimbles."
Meanwhile TaxProf writes on his blog that 51 percent of households pay no income tax. Have we finally succeeded in voting ourselves "largess from the public treasury"?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)