• Hair Braiders and Tow Trucks

    Virginia hair braiders — free at last!

    Gov. Bob McDonnell has just announced a “government reform initiative” that will eliminate two state agencies and 19 boards and commissions, and consolidate another 23 boards and commissions. Sounds really impressive… until you realize that the reforms are touted to save only $2 million a year.

    In a budget exceeding $40 billion a year, $2 million is chump change. If I were governor and saw it laying on the floor, I wouldn’t stoop over to pick it up. (Actually, I would pick it up. I’m just engaging in hyperbole here.) Making the changes is better than not making them, so this does represent progress of a sort. But let’s not kid ourselves, this is not what we’re talking about when we discuss the need to reinvent government.

    The two agencies slated for the deep six are the Virginia National Defense Industrial Authority and the Board of Towing and Recovery Operators. Among the boards and commissions to be eliminated are the Interagency Dispute Resolution Council, the Virginia Council on Indians and the Virginia Juvenile Enterprise Committee. Yawn.

    The most positive change to come from this initiative doesn’t affect agencies, boards or commissions at all. The governor is also de-regulating three professions: hair braiders, mold inspectors and remediators, and interior designers. Good. The state had no business meddling in those professions in the first place.

    Now that we’ve gotten the easy stuff out of the way, maybe we can focus on the stuff that really matters.

    — JAB


  • Washington on the James? Not yet, but We’re Working On It.

    Virginia has a low rate of long-term indebtedness compared to other states, but the debt burden can still take a bite out of the budget. Virginia will pay nearly $600 million in interest in 2012 after borrowing record amounts during the past few years, reports Peter Smith for Virginia Statehouse News.

    Interest payments will increase next year. Writes Smith:

    Bill Echelberger, a Senate fiscal analyst, told lawmakers gathered at the committeeโ€™s fall retreat that Virginia had seen the โ€œfour largest tax- supported debt acquisitionsโ€ in history during the past four years, including Gov. Bob McDonnellโ€™s $600 million transportation package.

    The large scale borrowing is expected to increase debt payments by $50 million in fiscal 2012, which comes as the state prepares for budget cuts. …

    Debt has more than doubled in the past six years, increasing from $5.8 billion in fiscal 2005 to $11.9 billion in fiscal 2011. Annual interest payments have increased at an even faster rate from $236 million in 2005 to a projected $593 million in 2012.

    Not included in those sums is $54 billion in unfunded pension obligations.

    If it’s any consolation, Virginia’s measly $600 million in interest payments compares to $240 billion budgeted for the federal government in 2012. Virginians account for 2.5% of the U.S. population, making our share of interest payments on the federal debt roughly $6 billion. Thus, the commonwealth’s debt burden is roughly one-tenth per capita of that of the U.S.

    — JAB


  • Penny Pinching Is Fine. But Virginia Needs to Think Big.

    It's no fun being governor when all you do is cut, cut, cut.

    James A. Bacon

    Gov. Bob McDonnell has the right instincts: When it comes to preparing the next two-year budget, Virginia needs to brace for the worst. The governor has asked state agencies to submit proposals for achieving budget reductions of 2, 4 and 6 percent of their General Fund appropriations. And they have responded, flooding the governor’s office with ideas from the profound to the quirky — from closing 1,000 prison beds to scrapping funding for the dangerous dog registry — giving him many options to choose from. (See the Times-Dispatch story here.)

    State revenues are forecast to grow 3.7% through the current budget year and 3.3% through 2013, but that’s not enough to cover the rising cost of state services and loss of aid from the federal government. And that’s the good news. The bad news? The failure of the congressional supercommittee to devise a federal deficit-reduction plan could trigger $1.2 trillion in automatic budget cuts, which will be divided equally between domestic and defense spending. With its economy so heavily tied to defense, Virginia could be especially hard hit. Meanwhile, there’s no predicting the impact on the U.S. economy of the European sovereign debt crisis or, a wild card, a possible melt-down of the super-heated Chinese economy. Never in my adult lifetime has there been so much uncertainty about where the economy is heading.

    So, I’m in favor of penny pinching. Even if that means saving $45,000 by delaying the replacement of equipment at veterans cemeteries or selling Department of Forestry buildings, to list two ideas noted in the Times-Dispatch article. Two-percent cuts in affected agencies would yield $77 million in savings in the fiscal 2013-2014 biennium, while 4% cuts would save $147 million, and 6% would lop off $220 million.

    The problem is that the economic uncertainties are so great that we could be talking about budget gaps measured in the 10 digits — $1 billion or more. Trimming and pruning line-item spending is necessary and good. But it’s not enough. If Virginia wants to close the long-term budget gap, it needs to fundamentally re-think how it delivers core services. At the risk of repeating previous posts, I would argue that legislators need to go for big, dramatic savings such as (in rough order of importance)…

    Reform transportation and land use. The scattered, disconnected, low-density pattern of human settlement patterns prevalent in Virginia drive up the cost of utilities and public services for local governments and create inexorable demand for more state transportation spending. We need to re-think the zoning policies and funding mechanisms that promote sprawl. There is no need to resort to leftist social engineering — just insist that Virginians pay the full costs relating to where they live, shop and work, and give developers more freedom to pursue infill and re-development.

    Build a market-based health care system. Now that Medicaid and employee health insurance are the fastest-rising component of state spending, Virginia should aspire to creating the most productive, efficient and innovative health care system among the 50 states. Primarily, that means creating new models for delivering health care, which requires more freedom for entrepreneurs to innovate and more flexibility in how Medicaid and private insurers pay for medical services.

    Reinvent K-12 education. Bust up the monopoly of the public schools, increase parental choice and foster experimentation and innovation. Promoteย  virtual learning. Encourage that incubator of testing and experimentation, “home” schooling, which is fast evolving into a sophisticated form of parental-led educational cooperatives. Allow parents to contract with teacher cooperatives. Government’s job should not be to educate every Virginian but to ensure that every Virginian gets an education.

    In the new age of austerity we find ourselves, we must aspire to achieving mind-bending gains in productivity through audacious change. Tinkering on the margins of existing programs will lead to nothing but an endless and unsatisfying cycle of cuts, cuts and more cuts.


  • Social Security Psychosis

    by James A. Bacon

    Calling politics in Washington, D.C., “dysfunctional” severely understates the incompetence, hypocrisy, intellectual dishonesty and cavalier disregard for the national well being that predominates in the nation’s capital. A better term would be “psychotic,” as in divorced from reality. Or even “schizophrenic,” characterized by a disintegration of the thought process and emotional control. How else can one describe a group of people seemingly bent upon the nation’s destruction?

    A case in point is the conflicting message regarding Social Security. As the Washington Post noted in a recent article, Social Security cash flow went “cash negative” lastย  year. Instead of running a surplus that gets applied to reducing the national deficit, the program ran in the red in 2o1o, augmenting the deficit by $46 billion.

    According to the most recent calculations of the Social Security and Medicare boards of trustees, the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) fund wasn’t supposed to slip into a chronic deficit until 2025, and it wasn’t supposed to drain its trust fund until 2038. But with slow economic growth and prolonged high unemployment, Social Security is bringing in tens of billions of dollars less in revenue than forecast, meaning that the trust fund will run dry earlier than anticipated. Meanwhile, the Disability Insurance fund began running a deficit in 2009 and is projected to exhaust its trust fund in 2018.

    And the reaction in Washington?

    โ€œLetโ€™s worry about Social Security when itโ€™s a problem. Today, it is not a problem,โ€ said Sen. Harry Reid in a March rally. Later, in an MSNBC interview, he added, โ€œSocial Security does not add a single penny, not a dime, a nickel, a dollar to the budget problems we have. Never has and, for the next 30 years, it wonโ€™t do that.โ€

    Wow! This guy is the Senate Majority Leader, the second most powerful politician in the country? Reid may not be swatting at imaginary fliesย and gibbering nonsense on the street corner, but he has constructed an alternate reality that exists nowhere but inside his head.

    Meanwhile, President Obama ignored the blueprint for Social Security reform advanced by his own deficit-cutting commission and decided last year instead to implement — with Republican connivance — a $105 billion payroll tax holiday. And he now proposes another tax break that would add another $267 billion to the Social Security deficit, an action so irresponsible and reckless that even Republicans have backed away from it.

    The Disability Insurance fund, an indispensable safety net for more than 10 million Americans, is scheduled to run out of money in seven years and the impending disaster is not a topic of conversation for neither the political class that purports to represent the people, nor the mainstream media, which purports to hold accountable those in power. The program currently costs $92.5 billion a year to administer. When its trust fund spends the last dollar, where will the money come from to cover the operating deficit?

    The Bowles-Simpson deficit-cutting plan would have restored Social Security to solvency by gradually phasing in payroll tax increases and trimming scheduled benefit increases so the burden didn’t fall on anyone too suddenly or severely. But the powerful AARP discouraged serious discussion of the ideas behind the plan, reports the Post, by “airing television ads in which an older man warns viewers that ‘some in Washington want to make a deal cutting the Social Security and Medicare benefits we worked for,’ instead of cutting โ€œwaste and loopholes.’”

    The phrase “pathological liar” comes to mind.

    When the reality of the Disability Insurance fund’s loomingย  meltdown has finally penetrated Congress’ collective consciousness, I am betting that it will address the problem by merging the DI fund with the much larger OASI fund, paying for disability benefits with revenues previously reserved for retirees. That would solve a smaller problem, saving the DI fund, which covers 10 million Americans, by accelerating the larger problem, the impending implosion of the OASI fund, which covers 47.5 million Americans.

    The very people who pose as champions of the social safety net are driving it to utter ruination.


  • Failed States Train Wreck Averted… for Now

    A year ago, I approvingly cited research by Wall Street analyst Meredith Whitney who predicted a wave of municipal bond defaults by state and local governments. (See “The Next Train Wreck: Failed States.”) There have been a handful of spectacular flame-outs — most notably the city of Harrisburg, Pa., and Jefferson County, Ala. —ย  but they are exceptions that prove the rule, concludes a paper by the National Association of State Budget Officers, “Municipal Bonds in 2011: An Update on State and Local Borrowing.”

    Write the authors:

    Municipal defaults continue to be a very small percentage of both the number of issuers and the aggregate dollar value of outstanding tax-exempt debt. There were no defaults on state general obligation bonds and none had been expected. In the first nine months of 2011, there were 42 municipal defaults totaling $949 million, falling from the 79 defaults experienced in 2010, amounting to $2.89 billion. The declining number of issuers defaulting, and the decreasing dollar value of those defaults indicates that local governments and municipalities are better able to meet debt obligations this year than in 2010.

    Further, the overwhelming majority of defaults were on bonds issued by hospitals, industrial development organizations, and housing development
    projects, not general obligation bonds tied to cities, counties, and states with taxing authority. The Harrisburg and Jefferson County bankruptcies can be traced to monumental human error, not systemic conditions. Conclude the authors: “Trends in the municipal markets suggest state and local governments will continue to have access to capital for years to come.”

    In the post I wrote a year ago, I feared the possibility that the federal government would be moved to bail out irresponsible states and municipalities. Fortunately, as financial conditions for the states gradually improve and as states from Wisconsin to California make tough choices, no federal intervention has been necessary. As the failure of the Congressional super-committee to craft a budget-fighting agreement drives home, the biggest systemic threat to governance in this country remains the federal government itself.

    — JAB


  • Want More Money for Rail-to-Dulles? Make the Project More Transparent.

    Transparency is a beautiful thing.

    It does not look like the Project Labor Agreement (PLA) controversy will fade away quietly. (For background, see “Games People PLA.”) Del. Robert G. Marshall, R-Manassas, has filed a bill to prohibit the use of state revenues for construction of Phase 2 of the Dulles Corridor Metrorail project unless the project meets three transparency standards.

    The recently signed Memorandum of Agreementย  between the McDonnell administration, the Obama administration, the Washington Metropolitan Airports Authority (MWAA), Fairfax County and Loudoun County calls for a restructuring of the costs and financing of Phase 2 of the $2.8 billion Rail-to-Dulles project. The state will contribute an additional $150 million to the construction, contingent upon approval by the General Assembly. Marshall’s bill is the first indication that the legislature’s approval cannot be taken for granted.

    House Bill No. 2 would prohibit the state from contributing any funds to Phase 2 if (1) the project is subject to a Project Labor Agreement, (2) the policies or bylaws of the MWAA governing public access to meetings and records areย  incompatible with Virginia’s Freedom of Information Act, or (3) phase 2 of the project and its finances will not be subject to audit by either the Virginia Department of Transportation or Auditor of Public Accounts.

    MWAA’s board wants to use the PLA that Dulles Transit Partners voluntarily adopted for Phase 1 and as a model for phase 2 — but make it mandatory. Critics charge that such a requirement would effectively eliminate non-union company from competition, resulting in a higher bid. An agreement between the state and the MWAA clarified that any PLA had to be consistent with the state’s Right to Work law, which protects the right of workers not to join a union, but left it unclear whether the MWAA still could require the prime contractor to adhere to a PLA with other requirements, such as hiring all workers (union or non-union) through a union work hall and contributing to union retirement funds.

    The financing for Phase 2, which will rely heavily upon toll revenue paid by commuters on the Dulles Toll Road, has been highly controversial in Fairfax and Loudoun counties. Without the state’s $150 million contribution, the deal brokered by U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood could well fall apart.

    The McDonnell administration has made no public comment upon the bill. But Marshall wrote in an email distribution of his bill, “Del. Joe May [R-Leesburg] and the McDonnell administration do not appear initially supportive of my effort to secure more transparency and accountability for taxpayer funds as provided in HB 2.”

    — JAB


  • Games People PLA

    Will the recent dealย  to salvage the $2.8 billion second leg of the Rail-to-Dulles project require non-unionย  bidders to play footsy with the construction unions? The answer is far fromย  clear.

    by James A. Bacon

    A deal struck between the McDonnell administration and theย  Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA) will not require bidders on Phaseย  2 of the Rail-to-Dulles project to sign a Project Labor Agreement (PLA). Orย  maybe it will. Itโ€™s really not clear. The wording of the Memorandum of Agreementย  (MOA) is ambiguous. At least one McDonnell administration official insists thatย  the rights of non-union workers and companies are upheld in the agreement but neitherย  the MWAA nor the Attorney Generalโ€™s office is talking.

    The PLA issue is a sensitive one. Earlier this year, theย  estimated cost of Phase 2 of the METRO rail project had ballooned roughly $1 billionย  higher than the $2.8 billion in funding sources lined up to pay for it. A dealย  brokered earlier this month by U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHoodย  seemingly got the project back on track by extracting various commitments andย  concessions from the state, MWAA, Fairfax County and Loudoun County, the four funding partners. The deal referenced a side agreement between Virginiaย  and the MWAA that details โ€œprinciples and requirementsโ€ for a labor agreement.

    In Phase 1 of the construction project, which extends the METRO past Tysons Corner, prime contractor Dulles Transit Partners enteredย  into a voluntary PLA to hire workers through a union hiring hall, although itsย  sub-contractors were not required to do so. MWAA has sought to make thatย  agreement mandatory for anyone bidding on Phase 2. But non-union companies andย  many Fairfax and Loudoun elected officials objected, asserting that such anย  agreement would discourage non-union companies from submitting bids. The lossย  of competition, critics said, could result in bids $300 million or more higherย  than the official estimate.

    It is precisely that outcome that the McDonnellย  administration sought to avoid, says Thelma Drake, director of the Departmentย  of Rail and Public Transportation. A sticking point in negotiating the broaderย  deal was MWAAโ€™s insistence that bidders on the prime contract be required toย  sign a PLA. โ€œWe worried that having the PLA up front would discourage some companiesย  from bidding,โ€ she explains. The Commonwealth Attorneyโ€™s office got involved inย  drafting the language to ensure that any PLA would be consistent with stateย  Right to Work laws.

    โ€œThe PLA is not mandatory,โ€ Drake says. โ€œYou cannot requireย  your prime to sign a PLA.โ€

    Sounds clear enough. But what does the actual MOA say?

    The agreement states that no prime contractor or subcontractorย  can require an employee to join a labor union. It also says that no prime orย  subcontractor can be โ€œdiscriminated againstโ€ based upon its affiliation or non-affiliationย  with a labor union. But then the MOA says this:

    ย  No prime contractor working orย  seeking to work on Phase 2 shall be required, in order to secure or maintain aย  phase 2 prime contract, to become a party to any labor agreement other than the Phase 2 PLA.

    To some observers, the wording “other than” seems to specifically exempt the Phase 2 PLA from the rule — especially when considered in the context of what follows, a principle that states sub-contractors shall not be required to sign any labor union contract, “including” the Phase 2 PLA. The wording would seem to create an arrangement nearly identical to the Phase 1 PLA, which binds Dulles Transit Partners to a union workforce but exempts subcontractors.

    โ€œThere are a lot of questions out there,โ€ says Angieย  Gutenson, vice president of the Virginia chapter of the Associated Builders andย  Contractors, which represents the interests of open-shop contractors in theย  state. The MOA states that Virginiaโ€™s Right to Work law will be enforced andย  that non-union companies will not be โ€œdiscriminated against.โ€ But what does โ€œdiscriminateย  againstโ€ mean in this context? โ€œWeโ€™re not lawyers, so we donโ€™t know.โ€ Read more.


  • The Era of Foreclosed Possibilities

    The 2007 recession marked the end of the era of Mass OverConsumption. Suburban sprawl is over. Itโ€™s time to think about what comes next โ€“ and to adapt state and local government policies to new realities.

    by James A. Bacon

    The United States reached a historic inflection point during the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008. Many politicians and pundits anticipated that the economy would quickly right itself, as it had after every other recession since World War II. But it didnโ€™t. From massive deficit spending to โ€œquantitative easing,โ€ federal authorities have tried stimulating the economy through time-tested methods of pumping up aggregate demand and lowering interest rates. But the economy shows no sign of returning to normal โ€“ and the future doesnโ€™t look any brighter. The national debt, now surpassing $15 trillion, has grown so enormous that the dead weight of interest payments will constitute an increasing drag on the economy for years to come.

    Historians will look back upon the recent recession as a bookend on an epoch in American history, the period beginning after World War II in which politics and the economy were organized around a bipartisan consensus to promote mass consumption or, as E M Risse prefers to call it, Mass OverConsumption. Politicians of both political parties competed on their ability to deliver economic growth, an expanded safety net and material comfort. Every American should own his own home. Everyone should be able to go to college. Everyone should own a car filled with cheap gas. Everyone should have high quality medical care. Everyone should enjoy a long and comfortable retirement.

    The problem, simply put, is that we are running out of money. Thatโ€™s not an easy truth to accept. Since the recession, politics has been marked by political gridlock in the nationโ€™s capital and the search for scape goats in the hinterlands. The populist Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street movements have fixed their wrath upon ruling elites who plunder the nation by manipulating a corrupt political system. They have ample reason to do so. But in their more reflective moments, most Americans would admit that they have brought some of their troubles upon themselves by living beyond their means, both individually and collectively. Consumers maintained living standards by borrowing more than they could afford. Government maintained spending by borrowing more than it could afford.

    Consumers were the first to collide with reality. The debt-fueled, consumer-driven economy came crashing down in 2007 and it cannot be reconstituted. The party is over, the hang-overs are throbbing, and someone has to mop up the puke on the floor. Meanwhile, it is increasingly apparent to all that the debt-fueled, government-driven economy is headed for the same fate, if not worse.

    While the fallโ€™s raucous presidential debate has focused the electorateโ€™s attention on the fiscal constraints of the federal government, similar currents are running through state and local governments. States, cities and counties, too, are grappling with a structural budget gap stemming from chronically weak revenues and the publicโ€™s unremitting demands for more services. Local governments are more restricted in their ability to borrow to pay for spending, so their financial plight is more immediate and more pressing. To date, the primary fault line has formed over the issue of public-employee pensions and benefits. But other changes taking place at the level of cities, counties and towns are even more profound and unsettling.

    Core state-and-local institutions invented or perfected in post-World War II Epoch of Unlimited Possibilities are rusting, rattling and running on fumes. Schools are graduating illiterates. Four-year college tuitions are the size of house mortgages. Health care inflation is pushing citizens, businesses and governments to the brink of insolvency. And the nationโ€™s infrastructure, once the envy of the world, is crumbling all around. Call it the Era of Foreclosed Possibilities.

    Across the country, states, cities and counties are ill equipped to deliver their contribution to the American dream. Nowhere is the crunch more evident than in the cluster of issues associated with โ€œgrowth managementโ€ โ€“ the ability to accommodate growing populations with affordable housing supported by roads, transit, water, sewer, fire, police, schools and other public services. Just as Americans had come to expect an endless list of benefits from the federal government without fully paying for them, they developed entirely unrealistic expectations about what state and local governments could afford. Middle-class Americans wanted to live in neighborhoods of detached, single-family houses set on big lots. They wanted untrammeled mobility, meaning a car for every, and they wanted โ€œthe governmentโ€ to build a road network that would allow them to drive anywhere, anytime, without undue congestion. And they wanted to keep taxes low.

    The paradigm that guided growth and development for six decades has hit a dead end. State and local governments can no longer afford to build infrastructure for and deliver services to a population scattered over hundreds of millions of acres in scattered, low-density, disconnected human settlement patterns โ€“ commonly referred to as โ€œsuburban sprawl.โ€

    Decades of experience have demonstrated that โ€œsprawlโ€ is fiscally unsustainable. The communities that have arisen from sprawl arenโ€™t even what people prefer. Americans tolerated dysfunctional settlement patterns because they seemed preferable to the high taxes, troubled schools and horrendous crime in the core cities. But urban flight is a spent force. In healthy metropolitan areas, there is ample evidence that household preferences are changing and the flow of people out of the urban core is more than matched by a migration back into it. Jobs, especially the best paying ones, remain clustered within a relatively tight radius of the metropolitan core. Cultural attractions such as the arts, museums and restaurants loom larger as lifestyle magnets for the growing ranks of empty nesters. Frightful crime rates that once repelled middle-class households are showing marked declines.

    Meanwhile suburban counties have developed intractable problems of their own: traffic congestion, overcrowded schools and increasing pressure on tax rates. Even before the 2007 recession, few Americans would have described life in โ€œsuburbiaโ€ as idyllic.

    biggest driver of change is an economic one: the rising cost of automobile ownership. According to the New Vehicle Index, the average cost of a new car surged 86.4% between 2000 and 2010, far outpacing the 26.6% increase in the Consumer Price Index over the same period. The Internal Revenue Service mileage reimbursement, a broader measure of the cost of ownership that includes insurance, maintenance, gasoline and other factors, increased almost as rapidly, from 32.5 cents in 2000 to 50 cents in 2010 โ€“ย  or 53%. The mileage reimbursement has climbed even higher in the past year, to 55 cents per mile. After housing, transportation is the biggest component of the household budget. With incomes stagnant, Americans are finding the auto-centric lifestyle of the suburbs increasingly unaffordable.

    Although gasoline is a relatively small segment of automobile ownership, it is one that people fixate on. Todd Litman, director of the Victory Transport Policy Institute, has developed a fascinating metric for tracking the affordability of gasoline: the number of miles a person can drive on one hourโ€™s worth of earnings. The calculation works like this: In 1967 annual median income in the United States was $2,464, gasoline cost $0.33 per gallon, and vehicles averaged 12.4 miles per gallon. An hour of work could buy you enough gasoline to travel 46 miles. In 2000, median incomes were $22,346, gasoline cost $1.51 per gallon and vehicles averaged 17 miles per gallon, meaning that an hour of work could buy you enough gasoline to travel 126 miles.

    After peaking in the late 1990s, travel affordability has declined precipitously. Wages have stagnated, fuel economy has improved only marginally but gasoline prices have risen. In 2010, an average work-hour could purchase enough fuel to take you 83 miles. (Remember, thatโ€™s gasoline only, not the full cost of car ownership.)

    All of these trends โ€“ increasing congestion, fiscal stress in county governments, demographic changes, falling crime rates and the rising cost of car ownership โ€“ were evident in the 2000s but they were obscured by the real estate bubble. Low interest rates maintained by the Federal Reserve Board, the scrapping of traditional lending standards engineered by Washington politicians, and Wall Streetโ€™s mass syndication of mortgage loans without regard to credit quality all combined to induce a fever of rising housing prices and real estate speculation. Flush with credit, developers did what theyโ€™d always done: They built new subdivisions and shopping centers where land was cheap and red tape minimal on the metropolitan periphery.

    The spasm of development in the 2000s was the last hurrah of the Epoch of Unlimited Possibilities. The bubble burst, housing prices collapsed, the economy tanked and millions of Americans lost their jobs. After two decades of accumulating debt, Americans realized they had been living beyond their means and resolved, with varying degrees of discipline, to mend their ways. This new frugality, bolstered by banksโ€™ tightening of lending standards, led to a loss of buying power. Americans had no choice but to re-engineer their lifestyles not only to live within their means, but to pay down debt and save for the retirement. Spending on housing and transportation, which constitute half of total household spending, plummeted as families re-engineered their lifestyles.

    There is no returning to the way things were. Banks will not renew the reckless lending of the 2000s any time soon. State and local governments will experience fiscal stress for years to come. The cost of automobile ownership will continue rising. The suburban growth model of the post-World War II, based on scattered, low-density development and segregated land uses, is shattered beyond mending.

    Americans now are stuck with trillions of dollars of houses, shopping centers, office parks, roads, utilities and other amenities that are arrayed geographically in a matter ill matched to the economic, technological and demographic realities. Reconstructing these human settlement patterns to better serve the future will cost trillions more, which means that the process will take decades under the best of circumstances. Creating a new urban fabric โ€“ a process I call the Great Retrofit — is one of the great challenges facing America today.

    Unfortunately, public policy in Virginia has not yet adapted to the new paradigm of consumer frugality and constrained government spending. The commonwealth is borrowing billions of dollars to expedite construction of road projects conceived during the heyday of suburban sprawl and locked into place through a bureaucratic process known as the Six Year Improvement Program. There has been no re-examination of the priorities set years ago.

    Instead of repeating past mistakes, we should be thinking creatively about how to adapt to new realities. In future essays, articles and blog posts, I hope to explore a new path forward.

    By James A. Bacon

    =============

    This article was made possible by a sponsorship of the Piedmont Environmental Council.


  • Who Needs Schools? Why Not Teacher Cooperatives?

    I find Walter Russell Meade to be one of the most provocative thinkers on the American scene today. In a recent blog post to The American Interest, he lays out a vision for the future of education that is very similar in ways to my own. This is exactly the kind of thing I’m talking about when I say we need to fundamentally re-think our educational system.

    Imagine a system in which our current top down, administration heavy school districts and large schools were replaced by networks of teachers who band together to offer instruction to students in a given neighborhood or district. A cooperative firm of anywhere from half a dozen to a few score teachers might open for business, receiving a government payment for each student they enroll. Parents would have the right to enroll their children with the coop of their choice. The test scores and other information would be available so that parents could assess the firmโ€™s track record.

    These firms could compete by offering different educational and disciplinary philosophies. A group of like minded teachers who wanted to use a particular curriculum or approach would be free to do so; if enough parents bring kids, the firm is in business.

    These firms could set their own policies about how many teacher aides they had, or even about class size. (Smaller classes would mean smaller revenue, but creative teachers who believed in the importance of smaller classes could find ways to cut other corners.) Teachers would be free to teach as they thought best; they could recruit congenial and like-minded colleagues into their coops. Rather than being evaluated by political hacks and administrators, their coops would stand or fall based on their ability to recruit and retain students from the community that knew them best.

    What largely disappears in this model is management as we know it. Some sort of skeleton administration would be necessary, but its size and powers would be greatly reduced. Teachers in this system would have much more autonomy than they do now โ€” and parents would have much more choice. Because less money will be sucked up by administrators, consultants and large bureaucratic offices of enforcement and conformity promotion, more money can go to the people and services on the front lines.

    Read more.

    — JAB


  • The Wonk Salon, November 21, 2011

    U.S. Industries Need a “Competitiveness Audit”
    Progressive Policy Institute
    Local, state and federal government need a “competitiveness audit” of American industries to guide the allocation of economic development resources. Target those industries that have a chance of becoming economically competitive and write off the losers.

    New Technologies More Effective than Compact Development at Cutting Greenhouse Gases

    Reason Foundation
    If your goal is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, new technologies such as hydrogen fuel cells and plug-in electric cars paired with electricity from hydro-power would accomplish the goal far more cost effectively than mandating more compact development.

    South Carolina Colleges Too Expensive, Graduation Rates Too Low
    South Carolina Policy Council
    Everybody’s applying a critical eye now to state systems of higher education, even South Carolina. The interests of individual institutions outweigh those of the state.

    Time to Focus on Community College Graduation Rates
    Center for an Urban Future
    Community colleges are a key vehicle for upward social mobility, but New York’s are falling short of the potential. Increasing the graduation rate by 10 percentage points could give a $71 million one-year boost to the state and students.

    How to Make College More Affordable: Expand Tax Credits
    Third Way
    College is increasingly unaffordable. So let’s do more of what caused the problem in the first place — increase tuition subsidies, this time through a consolidation and expansion of tax credits.


  • If You’ve Lost David Brooks, You’ve Lost America


    When keepers of the conventional wisdom and guardian of the status quo like David Brooks say the United States is becoming another Greece, you can pretty well assume that we’re becoming another Greece. The political divide between Ds and Rs is so wide that the New York Times columnist can’t see how the $1 trillion-a-year budget gap can be bridged.

    That’s pretty much the conclusion that I came to a year and a half ago when I was writing “Boomergeddon.” Back then, the idea that the U.S. might one day default upon its debt seemed laughable — the raving of a Tea Party fanatic. Now Mr. Establishment, David Brooks, is resigning himself to the inevitable. “The short answer,” he says, “is, welcome Greece. We’re going to be Greece.”

    Just a refresher of what I wrote before the 2010 election:

    Tea Partiers may propel the Rs to electoral gains in November, but it’s not clear that the Elephant Clan has the will to defy the organized special interests in Washington, D.C., much less to make transformative reforms that can return the country to a sustainable fiscal trajectory. As long as Obama is president, until January 2013 at the very least, even the eviction of the Donkey Clan as the majority party in Congress will result in little change for two more years. By then, the nation will be $3 trillion deeper in hock, the economy will be as hooked as ever upon Keynesian spending stimulus to keep growing, society’s “unmet needs” will be as acute as always, the evaporation of the Medicare Part B trust fund will be looming on the horizon, and foreign investors will be even more antsy about the ability of the U.S. to repay its debt.”

    Taxpayers may vehemently oppose deficit spending and the mounting national debt, but those who pay no federal income taxes — about 43 percent of the population, according to the center-left Tax Policy Center — will oppose with equal vehemence any move to cut entitlements, and both parties will demagogue anyone who proposes to touch Social Security and Medicare. Just look at what the Democrats did to George Bush’s proposal to reform Social Security, and observe how Republicans accused Obamacare of undermining Medicare. Any change, if it comes, will likely be incremental and insufficient to divert the federal government from its downward slide.” …

    Although it may be theoretically possible to extricate ourselves … the prospects that the political class, either of the two party/clans or even a majority of the American people will be willing to make the necessary sacrifices are remote.

    Once again, I repeat my refrain that the only bastion of functional government in the post-Boomergeddon world will be those forward-looking state and local governments that saw the calamity coming and acted aggressively to shore up their finances and reinvent core institutions, such as transportation, land use, schools, higher ed and health care, upon which our well being depends. The Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street are nothing compared to the unrest to come when the financial markets begin dictating U.S. fiscal policy. They are no more than a warm-up act for what’s to come. They’re not even that, they’re the roadies who walk onto the stage and tinker with the amplifiers before the warm up act. Repent, sinners, the judgment day (of the financial markets) soon will be at hand!

    — JAB


  • Link between Poverty and Obesity

    Image credit: Washington Times

    New column published in the Washington Times.

    by James A. Bacon

    A while back, I attended the homecoming game between Collegiate and St. Christopherโ€™s, two prep schools in the Richmond, Va., area. For the most part, the parents in the football stands were well-to-do professionals, executives and business owners who could afford to pay stiff private school tuition. Midway through the game, my daughter articulated a thought that had been coalescing in my own head: โ€œItโ€™s amazing. There arenโ€™t any fat people here.โ€

    I had quite a different impression a few years ago when, on a lark, I attended a World Wrestling Federation event, a form of entertainment favored by the working class. I was stunned. Iโ€™d never seen so many morbidly overweight people before. I felt as if Iโ€™d been teleported to the Brookhaven Clinic.

    Obesity has reached epidemic proportions in the United States, surging from 13 percent of the population in 1960 to 34 percent in 2006 and contributing to epidemics of hypertension, diabetes and other chronic diseases. Treating those maladies costs an estimated $117 billion annually, half of which is financed by Medicare and Medicaid.

    While everyone laments the trend, there is no consensus on what causes it. The rise of obesity coincides with the falling price of groceries over the long term and the proliferation of fast food outlets, making food more affordable and more accessible to all segments of society. But thatโ€™s not a sufficient explanation. If the means to purchase more food and patronize restaurants were what made people fat, wealthy people would be the butterballs, not poor people. But the opposite is the case. It is well-documented in countries across the developed world that obesity is correlated with lower socioeconomic status.

    Why would that be? One explanation blames forces beyond poor peoplesโ€™ control. โ€œLow-income and food-insecure people are especially vulnerable due to the additional risk factors associated with poverty, including limited resources, limited access to healthy and affordable foods, and limited opportunities for physical activity,โ€ asserts the Food Research and Action Center. โ€œHouseholds with limited resources โ€ฆ often try to stretch their food budgets by purchasing cheap, energy-dense foods that are filling – meaning that they try to maximize their calories per dollar in order to stave off hunger.โ€

    So, the prodigious appetite for potato chips and cheese puffs is driven by โ€œfood insecurity.โ€ Yeah, right. Hereโ€™s an alternate explanation: People buy junk food because it tastes good, it gives them a brief sensation of pleasure, and they donโ€™t care about the consequences – not because they are trying to โ€œmaximize their calories per dollar.โ€

    Three economists, Charles J. Courtemanche, Garth Heutel and Patrick McAlvanah, have just written a paper, published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, exploring the influence of โ€œtime preferenceโ€ – the value that people place upon present consumption versus future consumption – upon dietary choices. Some people are impatient, the authors observe. They have less impulse control. They are less willing to defer gratification.

    Drawing upon the 2006 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, which includes a wealth of personal data, including Body Mass Index (BMI) as well as answers to questions regarding hypothetical time-related trade-offs, the scholars conclude: โ€œAs economic factors lower the opportunity cost of food consumption, impatient individuals gain weight while the most patient individuals do not. BMI therefore rises, but the rise is concentrated among a subset of the population.โ€

    Translation: As food has gotten more affordable over the years, some people have gotten fatter because they are more impulsive and shortsighted and prefer to eat food that gives them a quick sugar rush over healthier foods that donโ€™t.

    Many lower-income people are like children from more affluent families who also suffer from impulse-control issues. My eighth-grade son, left to his own devices, would happily subsist on Cheerios, Klondike bars and macaroni and cheese. The reason he doesnโ€™t is that my wife and I strip the house bare of candy, cookies, ice cream, potato chips, Twinkies, Fritos, Cheetos, sugared soft drinks and other cheap carbs. In a grueling battle of wills, we compel him (with varying degrees of success) to work broccoli, fruit and garden salads into his diet. We subject him to lectures on how his eating habits today will affect his health and physical appearance in the far distant future – like when he’s in high school.

    The difference is culture. To achieve success in the United States requires a willingness to excel at school, forgo income while spending years in college, subject oneself to the strictures of the workplace and live within oneโ€™s means – in sum, to stifle impulse and embrace the boring bourgeois virtues. The willingness to defer gratification is the same trait it takes to maintain disciplined eating and exercise habits over decades. Thatโ€™s a big reason the preppy moms and dads of Richmond have plump wallets but lean derrieres while many of the working stiffs across town are wheezing and overweight.


  • Bacon Recants on Port Post

    Joe D. Harris, media & public relations manager for the Virginia Port Authority, takes exception to a suggestion in my recent post, “A Baltimorean View of Virginiaโ€™s Ports,” that the Port of Virginia should take a cue from the Port of Baltimore and pursue a more export-oriented strategy. His observations follow:

    Your idea to use the Port of Baltimoreโ€™s cargo strategy, focusing on exports and roro/breakbulk cargoes, as a possible model for building business at The Port of Virginia proceeds from several inaccuracies and misconceptions. Allow me to explain.

    More than a decade ago, the Port of Baltimore had no choice but to find an alternative to handling containerized cargoes because Virginia successfully competed for the majority of Baltimoreโ€™s container business. The reason we secured that cargo was, in large part, simple geography: A container ship can arrive in Virginia, have its import and export boxes handled and get underway to its next destination, often before a ship can complete its inbound trip up the Chesapeake Bay to the Port of Baltimore. The operations savings to the ship line can be in excess of $75,000 per voyage by making its call in Virginia vs. Baltimore.

    In the port business, you desire balanced trade, and by this I mean you want 50 percent imports and 50 percent exports. Up until the worldโ€™s economy soured in 2008, The Port of Virginia was one of the few ports in the nation that maintained anything approaching that mix: on average we were 51/49 (imports vs. exports โ€“ containerized cargoes).

    Because the American dollar is weak, our goods are more affordable to overseas buyers, thus US exports are up across the board and Virginia is benefiting. When the dollar strengthens, the export business shrinks as American-made goods are suddenly more expensive. The hedge against these swings is a strong โ€“ balanced โ€“ import portfolio. Virginia would be ill-advised to engage in a business plan focused heavily on exports; a plan that hinges on the dollar remaining weak for the next 10 to 20 years or that labor costs in the US will become competitive enough to bring manufacturing back to our nation.

    Any maritime industry economist will tell you that in the port business, profit is made on the head-haul route – import containers from Asia to the U.S. That model is based on these facts: 1) the fixed costs 2) ease of handling 3) throughput and 4) container volumes vs. labor-intensive non-containerized cargoes. Moreover, no ship line would build a service focused on moving American exports because of the volatility associated with the market segment. One thing is certain: America remains a consumer society and regardless of economic challenges: brick-and-mortar operations will continue to feed, clothe and entertain our citizens.

    At Newport News Marine Terminal we handle paper, steel, machine tools and any manner of breakbulk cargo. In fact, at that terminal last week we took delivery of the first of many shipments of Infinity automobiles. At Norfolk International Terminals there is interest in setting up a transload operation for grain and across the harbor at Portsmouth Marine Terminal we have several companies interested setting up bulk cargo operations.

    Our strategy is seeking balance and building business based on sound planning, logic and capitalizing on our geographic assets.

    My post was based on the mistaken assumption that Virginia ports handle significantly more container imports than exports. If the container traffic is nearly balanced, as Harris says it is, then my argument — that one way to avoid the necessity of expanding transportation capacity out of Hampton Roads would be to build a more balanced import/export container traffic mix — breaks down. — JAB


  • Paying Profs to Write Books that Nobody Reads

    by James A. Bacon

    Mark Bauerlin, an English professor at Emory University, has identified one of the key productivity issues facing higher education in the United States today: the publish or perish phenomenon that drives university professors to devote insane amounts of time to writing books and journal articles that nobody reads. The problem is especially acute in the humanities.

    In a “Literary Research: Costs and Impact,” a review of four university English departments (territory that he knows first hand), Bauerlin contendsย  that thousands of English professors are collectively paid millions of dollars to produce voluminous scholarly books and articles, most of which is little read.

    โ€œThere is a glaring mismatch between the resources these universities and faculty members invest and the impact of most published scholarship,โ€ he writes. โ€œDespite the scant attention paid to this scholarship, a faculty memberโ€™s promotion and annual review depends heavily on the professorโ€™s published work. A universityโ€™s resources and human capital is thereby squandered as highly-trained and intelligent professionals toil over projects that have little consequence.โ€

    The amount of activity devoted to the publishing of literary research is extraordinary. The number of annual scholarly publications (books, essays, reviews, dissertations, etc.) in the fields of English and foreign languages and literatures climbed from 13,757 in 1959 to around 70,000 in recent years. By one count, there are 4,686 periodicals devoted to literary research and criticism. Writes Bauerlin: “The [Modern Language Association] counts 700+ departments across the country demanding that faculty members issue books and articles, indicating that the old publish-or-perish formula which used to apply to a small elite group of schools has become a national policy steering more than 50,000 graduate student, lecturer, adjunct, tenure-track and tenured language and literature practitioners and aspirants.”

    The four English departments he examined — the University of Georgia, SUNY-Buffalo, University of Vermont and University of Illinois — employ a total of 156 faculty between them.ย  Assuming that they expect professors to devote one-third of their time to research, the four English departments paidย  roughly $4 million yearly to produce an effluvia of essays: 76 authored or co-authored books, 50 edited or co-edited books, and 550 research essays between 2004 and 2009. Judging by the number of citations picked up in Google Scholar, very little of this work attracted significant attention.

    Extrapolate Bauerlin’s findings across the hundreds of college-level English, literature and other humanities departments across the country, and it is readily apparent that vast sums — perhaps exceeding $1 billion — are squandered nationally. While faculty members should be encouraged to conduct research, they should not be compelled to do so. Professors should be rewarded for teaching well — and for teaching more. The incentives are utterly perverted, focused on internal organizational imperatives and ignoring the interests of students.

    Virginia lawmakers should probe the productivity issue when dispensing state funds to higher education. It’s one thing to subsidize someone’s education — in theory, people gain valuable skills that benefit society as a result — but it’s quite another to subsidize the mass production of literary essays. If Virginia colleges and universities can’t enact culture change on their own, then the state should foster enterprises whose faculty focus on teaching, not publishing, in the expectation that they will charge a fraction of what incumbent colleges are charging.


  • IG of the Day: Staying Put

    Source: Brookings Institution, "Americans Still Stuck at Home"

    Geographic mobility within the United States has been declining steadily since the late 1980s. Only 11.6 percent of U.S. residents moved between 2010 and 2011, down from 12.5 percent the previous year. It was the lowest rate since 1948.

    William H. Frey with the Brookings Institution attributes that decline to two broad factors. First, long-distance migration (moving to new counties or states) is off due to the recession and crash in housing prices. Second, a fall-off in local mobility is explained by the aging of the population and high rates of home ownership. “Adult college graduates, the lifeblood of the national labor market, are not finding jobs in new places, and appear to be staying in their homes,” Frey says. “Meanwhile, young adults in their early 20s โ€” newly graduated from college or starting out in life โ€” are moving much less, especially between counties, than just five years ago.”

    Fast-growth metropolises in the Sun Belt are seeing fewer newcomers. Donor states such as California, New York and Massachusetts are leaking fewer of their college grads.

    Virginia, according to Frey’s data, bucked the trend. It is one of nine states that experienced net in-migration between 2005 and 2007 and then increased the net in-migration between 2008 and 2010. My guess is that Northern Virginia, with an economy propped up by federal spending, accounts for most of those gains. It is worth noting, however, that Maryland continued to lose migrants, though at a slower rate than previously.

    — JAB