I, Pencil: the Movie

The Buckeye Institute believes in free markets.  We know that there is simply no way in which a centralized authority can ever make wiser decisions on the allocation of scarce resources than the decentralized decision making of those on the ground nearest to those resources.

This concept can very simply be explained by the below video that was produced by our friends at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.  Based on the famous essay by Leonard Read (so famous that Milton Friedman wrote an introduction to a reprint), this video shows how something as seemingly simple as the creation of a pencil requires a complex web of relations to function together not through government fiat, but through free associations.

Watch it and you will understand what the free market is all about and why it needs to be defended.

YouTube Preview Image
Posted in Economy, Regulation | Tagged | Leave a comment

Why is Ohio on Verge of Population Decline? 

If each state in America is its own laboratory of democracy in action, there are numerous states that Ohio might want to consider emulating. Those are states that are seeing their populations grow and their private economies expand.  By contrast, Ohio lost two Congressional seats after the 2010 Census and has lost eight since the 1960s.  Sadly, the trend looks set to continue as Ohio persists in lagging most other states in the country in terms of population growth.

According to a recent Dayton Daily News story, Ohio’s population grew a paltry 3,218 from July 1, 2011 to July 1, 2012.  That is a .03 percent increase and is another reminder of the long decline of Ohio’s relative economic position nationally. According to the U.S. Census, Ohio had the third worst population growth rate in the nation between 2000 and 2012, growing at only 1.59 percent, or under 181 thousand residents.  This comes on the heels of the fact that Ohio is already suffering a real brain drain as its youth population has already been declining.  According to the 2010 Census, Ohio’s under 18 population declined nearly 158 thousand.

This cannot be a surprise given that Ohio lost over 614,000 private sector jobs from 2000-2010, the second highest number of any state.  In fact, only Michigan lost more with over 700,000 private sector jobs lost, and Michigan was also the only state to actually lose population during the 2000-2012 timeframe.

As our Ohio by the Numbers shows, even during the “golden years” of the 1990s when the economy was booming by most standards, Ohio was growing far below the national average.  In fact, its private sector job growth rate of 17 percent was only good enough to clock in at number 38 nationally.  By contrast, the top state in the country, Nevada, grew 66 percent.

While Ohio has seen serious improvements over the past couple of years in terms of private sector job growth, ranking 17 since January of 2010 with nearly 209,000 net jobs, it is going to take serious reform for Ohio to climb out of the hole its in and to attract businesses that create jobs and potential residents evaluating their economic prospects.

So is there anything fast population growing states are doing differently?  Yes.

The top five states for population growth between 2000 and 2012 are all Right-to-Work states (Nevada, Utah, Arizona, Texas and Idaho).  Additionally, these are states that have kept their total tax burden in reasonable order.   According to the non-partisan Tax Foundation, in 2010 all five of the top population growing states had a combined state and local tax burden that ranked them in the bottom half of combined state and local tax burden.  Three of them- Texas, Nevada, and Arizona- were in the bottom 10.  By contrast, the five states with the worst population growth rates were all in the top 20 for highest combined state and local tax burden.

It should be pointed out that Ohio has been improving its comparative position regarding tax burden.  As recently as 2005, Ohio ranked as the seventh highest combined tax burden in the nation compared to only twentieth in 2010 according to the non-partisan Tax Foundation.   This was after significant tax reform, including a 21 percent personal income tax cut initiated by former Governor Taft that was frozen by Governor Strickland and then allowed to fully phase in by Governor Kasich.

However, Ohio still has a complex, multiple bracket income tax that could stand further reform, or better yet, elimination.  We also simply cannot ignore the fact that according to the Ohio Department of Taxation, we have the sixth highest local tax burden as a percentage of income in the nation.  Not only do we have local property taxes, we have local sales and, most problematic, local income taxes!  Staggeringly, we have the second largest number of municipal income taxing entities in the nation at 593 and we also have 181 school districts that can levy income taxes as well.

Here is the bottom line: while there are a myriad of reasons that play into migration patterns within the United States, labor freedom and taxes are key.  People are voting with their feet and they are choosing states that embrace workplace freedom and relatively low state and local tax burdens.

Ohio is improving, but it remains to be seen if it can improve fast enough to get back into the game and compete with other states on a sustained basis.  In this sense, Ohio remains an ongoing experiment of democracy in action: will it embrace a freedom agenda that will unshackle small businesses and incentivize other businesses in America to give Ohio a more favorable look?  Or will it slip back into a complacency that has pushed it to the bottom of the pack of states with population growth and economic opportunity?

Posted in Economy, Taxes | Tagged | Leave a comment

Indiscriminate Cuts Likely to Lead to Job Losses: What the Fiscal Cliff Means Part 3

The “Fiscal Cliff” is rapidly approaching.  We have already discussed how this combination of tax increases and indiscriminate Federal spending cuts will cost Ohioans more, potentially handicap our national defense, all while failing to address the main driver of our increasing national debt:–entitlement spending.  Additionally, make no mistake: indiscriminate cuts to Defense will also cost Ohioans jobs.

Defense spending should not be viewed as a “jobs program” or through any other type of Keynesian lens.   Yet, as articulated in Part 2 of our series on the “Fiscal Cliff,” it is important to understand that Defense is, arguably, the most important function with which the Federal government is tasked.  It is also explicitly referred to by the Constitution.  Consequently, while the unbalanced cutting that targets Defense should be viewed primarily through the prism of how it will impact our overall security, it should be noted that there are many jobs in Ohio that will be impacted as well.

The exact number of jobs losses that can be expected due to Defense cuts as part of “sequestration” is practically impossible to nail down with certitude.  Despite this, numerous efforts at some quantification have been attempted.

A study done for the Aerospace Industries Association estimated that Ohio could see a loss of 18.4 thousand jobs with a resulting $1.6 billion hit to the Gross State Product as a result of Defense cuts.  This particular study understates the total number of likely job losses as it only took into account those in the aerospace industry in Ohio.   Other industries such as those affiliated with the Joint Systems Manufacturing Center, popularly known as the Lima Army Tank Plant, or Battelle in Columbus were not included in the study.

Meanwhile, the Center for Security Policy (CSP) also attempted to put some numbers on paper.  It used 2011 data regarding the dollar amounts for a variety of Defense related contracts as a baseline to approximate the cuts Ohio businesses could anticipate.

Overall, CSP estimated that Ohio businesses would stand to lose over $1.1 billion.  You can view a dollar breakdown of the cuts by county here, by city here and by type of business here.

Obviously, substantial revenue losses translate into either hiring freezes (at best) or, more likely, less jobs.

The point here is not to argue that Defense cuts should be off the table.  If the U.S. is ever to begin getting its domestic fiscal house in order, there can be no area of the budget that are sacrosanct.  However, Defense, unlike entitlement spending, is a core function of government.  A scalpel approach to Defense makes a great deal of sense, using a meat cleaver does not.

The tragedy of the present situation is that we now face a crisis bequeathed to us by politicians that were unable to make tough decisions earlier.

National tax policy reasonably could have been addressed years ago and resulted in a more fair and competitive tax code.  It was not.  Intelligent, not haphazard, spending cuts could have been implemented years ago that would put us on a more sustainable path.  They were not.  Now, we face a crisis that could result in millions of Ohioans taking home less in their wallets for a day’s work thanks to increased taxes which are set to be hiked in order to pay for unsustainable government spending.  All the while, they will also be watching careless cuts to core government functions take place that will lead to unnecessary job losses and gaps in security.

We need a rational policy in D.C. that keeps us from going over the “Cliff” and puts us back on a path to security, sustainability and prosperity.

Posted in Economy, Taxes | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Peace Through Strength Gutted? What the Fiscal Cliff Means Part 2

In Part 1 of our examination of the looming “Fiscal Cliff,” we noted that a failure to resolve a major policy impasse in Washington would leave Ohioans facing higher taxes and job losses as a result.  In Part 2, we will address the negative implications for Ohio’s and the nation’s defense should politicians in Washington drive us over the “Cliff.”

Defense is a primary, necessary, and constitutionally ordained function of the national government.  An inability to defend one’s country makes other concerns and functions of government moot.  The Founding Fathers understood this, and thus constitutionally vested the national government with the authority and indeed the duty to defend the nation.

Unfortunately, if the U.S. goes over the “Fiscal Cliff,” a round of indiscriminate cuts, known as “sequestration” will be made to the Federal Budget.  The cuts will impact many areas of spending, ranging from 7 to 10 percent of what is called “discretionary spending.” National defense is largely considered “discretionary” and is the main target of sequestration.

But the meat cleaver of sequestration falls disproportionately on Defense.

As the Heritage Foundation indicates: of the $1.1 trillion in Federal Budget cuts scheduled to begin in January and commence over the next decade, $492 billion, or nearly 43 percent, is obtained through Defense cuts.  Meanwhile, only 14.8 percent, or $171 billion, will be cut from “Entitlement” spending which comprises Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

While almost everyone can agree that the Federal Government needs to dramatically curb its spending appetite, the problem with the sequester is that the lion’s share of the debt burden the U.S. is currently accruing comes from Entitlement spending, not Defense.  In fact, in 2012, Entitlement spending accounted for 10 percent of U.S. GDP, while Defense accounted for only 4.5 percent.

In a way, sequestration is like cutting off a patient’s leg in order to deal with an infected toe.  It is entirely indiscriminate, fails to focus on the driver of the national debt, and runs the significant risk that the U.S. may find itself unprepared to adequately address a global security environment that is highly unstable.

For those that think the world is a relatively benign place and that we can reduce our military readiness without repercussion, consider that the global challenges the U.S. is facing:

  •  an aggressive nuclear weapon’s development program continued by a radical Islamist government, which has previously taken to calling the U.S. the “Great Satan” (Iran);
  • recurrent nuclear tests by a rogue state with a history of supporting terrorism (North Korea);
  • an amorphous and dedicated group of terrorists willing to die in their cause including, if they can, through the use of weapons of mass destruction;
  • the possible re-introduction of chemical weapons in conflict (Syria);
  • the military rise of an authoritarian China that is already acquiring the ability to potentially deny the U.S. access to trading routes in East Asia, arguably the new economic center of the world.

Additionally, lest one think this is all about what happens “over there,” Ohio has faced global threats right here in our own backyard.

As Buckeye Institute President, Robert Alt, outlined in a recent post on National Review’s Corner blog:

“…four of the 50 terrorist plots prevented since 9/11 have had a nexus with Ohio, including a foiled plot to bomb an Ohio shopping mall, a terrorist from Columbus convicted for providing material support to al-Qaeda to destroy the Brooklyn Bridge, three men convicted in Toledo for plotting to commit acts of terror against Americans overseas, and Christopher Paul, a Columbus citizen who was arrested for conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction against targets in Europe and the United States, and who agreed to a plea deal under which he is serving 20 years in prison.”

While all of the above scenarios could play out in peaceful ways, prudence demands that the United States have the military capacity to address these challenges if foreign powers or terrorists act in ways that are contrary to our national security interests.  This requires a robust U.S. military that is able to address such events as they emerge to threaten our security.  While there may well be a need for surgical cuts to the U.S. Defense Budget, the hatchet being wielded as part of sequestration is a poor and dangerous tool that largely ignores the real drivers of our national debt.

President Reagan often said, “We must find peace through strength.”  We should not forget that admonition today.

In Part 3 of our look at the “Fiscal Cliff” and its impact, we will look at how the indiscriminate cuts, particularly the Defense cuts, could adversely impact Ohio jobs.

Posted in Economy, Taxes | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Judge Robert H. Bork: Keeper of the Flame and Defender of the Republic

One of the greatest legal minds of our time, Robert Bork, passed away early this morning at the age of 85. His passing strikes close to home.  He was my first boss in Washington when I was but a lowly intern, and the impression he left on me was both overwhelmingly good and indelible.  Any attempt to fully capture the man will be doomed to failure.  And so, with failure pre-ordained, I am compelled to say that Judge Bork was a towering intellect, a quick wit, and honest to the core.

In moments of loss like this, we typically recount the myriad of accomplishments one has achieved in life.  Judge Bork certainly had these.  He was, after all, a Distinguished Fellow at the Hudson Institute, a U.S. Solicitor General, acting U.S. Attorney General, and judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. He also spent years in private practice and as a professor at the Yale Law School.

His work in antitrust law was so influential—it reshaped the way that the entire legal profession thought about the discipline, and his book The Antitrust Paradox was listed as one of the most significant books of the last century—that this accomplishment alone would have merited his inclusion in the list of modern legal luminaries.

Yet Judge Bork’s influence is far deeper and grander than a list of impressive titles.  Not only was a transformative figure in antitrust law, he was keeper of the flame of Originalist jurisprudence and a true defender of our Republic.

He defended this nation’s founding principles at a time when these principles came under such sustained assault that many a weaker man would have been tempted to disengage from the good fight.  That he never did is a testament to his willpower, love of country, and understanding that it is only by clearly articulating our principles that we can hope to defend them.

In 2008, when I was the Director of Rule of Law Programs at the Heritage Foundation, Judge Bork inaugurated  Heritage’s Joseph Story Distinguished Lecture series.   His speech, A Republic–If You Can Keep It, truly is a perfect epitaph for his life’s mission of battling against the dangerous tides and corrupting influences of an activist judiciary that seeks to impose its preferred outcomes rather than apply the law and the Constitution.

As we endeavor to implement public policies that will enhance our liberties, we must recognize the problem of an activist judiciary that can erase all of our hard work in favor of the preferred outcomes of a few willful judges.  Combating this is key to protecting our Republic from devolving into a system in which we are governed not by the rule of law, but by judicial fiat.

Judge Bork, better than most, understood this.  He also deeply understood that this struggle was, at its heart, an intellectual battle, the outcome of which will fundamentally shape the soul of America for generations to come.  He states in the Story Lecture that,

“Thirty-five to 40 years ago, there was almost no intellectual support for originalism in the academic world, where that philosophy was commonly regarded as at best passé and at worst reactionary. Today, a sizeable body, though by no means the majority, of constitutional law professors, explicitly or implicitly, adhere to that view of constitutional interpretation. That is having an effect on those students who will comprise the next generation of scholars and, through them, on the judges of the future…

… Almost regardless of the outcome of the intellectual struggle, however, there remains the political battle to nominate and confirm justices and judges who spurn activism as an illegitimate creed and will be guided in their deliberations by the original understanding of the principles of the Constitution. This may be the more difficult task. Many politicians, and the activist groups of the Left which they serve in these matters, simply have no interest in the legitimacy of constitutional interpretation; they care only about results.

Our hope, if there is to be hope, must be in the appointment of new justices holding an originalist philosophy. That is necessary if not sufficient for the preservation of a republican form of government.”

If hope is a flame that we must hold, we are incalculably better off to have had Judge Robert Bork as one of our leaders and keepers of that flame. He will be missed, but his memory will not fade so long as we still believe in our Republic and continue his, and our, fight. Requiescat In Pace.

You can download the video of the full lecture by clicking here.

 

Posted in Annoucements | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Happy New Year: Pay More to Uncle Sam or What the Fiscal Cliff Means Part One

Unless the impasse in Washington is resolved soon, America will go over the so-called “Fiscal Cliff.”  We’ve all heard the term, but what exactly is the “Fiscal Cliff”?  The “Fiscal Cliff” is a combination of massive tax increases as well as large scale, but indiscriminate Federal spending cuts that are due to come into effect on January 1, 2013.  The result would be higher taxes and job losses for Ohioans and the nation.

The circumstances surrounding the creation of the “Fiscal Cliff” are complex and go back years.  They include past congressional failure to permanently extend the Bush-era tax cuts as well as the failure to obtain a bipartisan deal on shrinking the massive $16 plus trillion US debt in 2011 as part of negotiations over extending the US debt ceiling.

In Part One, we will take a quick look at the first piece of the Fiscal Cliff: the tax hikes.

A myriad of tax increases will begin hitting Ohioans on January 1.  Among these are:

  • The re-introduction of the Federal Death Tax;
  • A reduction in child credits;
  • Payroll tax increases (Social Security)
  • The elimination of the Alternative Minimum Tax Patch that prevents “bracket creep” where middle-class earners are stuck with a much higher rate;
  • Increases on capital gains and dividend taxes;
  • Other new taxes as a result of Obamacare, including a new tax on medical device manufacturers and a cap on the amount that can be set aside tax free in Flexible Savings Accounts in order to pay for families’ medical needs.

These tax increases are expected to have a significant and negative impact on US GDP growth.

According to the non-partisan Tax Foundation, the US GDP could be as much as 9.6 Percent lower ten years out as a result of the numerous changes.  This isn’t cumulative—this is the loss at year 10, and so the total loss of growth would be substantially higher.

Outside of the loss of GDP, and an attendant loss of jobs due to those increases, Ohioans will be paying more in a time of economic uncertainty.

According to another analysis done by the Tax Foundation, a family of four in Ohio earning the state median income of  $72.8 thousand (in 2011 dollars) would see a federal tax increase of $3,437 or 4.72 percent.

Overall, the tax increases that would be imposed as a result of the full Fiscal Cliff will reduce the economic freedom of all Americans.  As the Heritage Foundation points out, the US has already fallen from the fifth freest nation in the world in 2008 to the tenth in 2012.   The fall will continue if the Cliff is not avoided.

This is hardly the time for large tax increases, not that there is a good time.  Tax increases suppress economic vitality by sapping the incentive for people to work hard and enjoy the fruits of their labors.  They create negative incentives for additional investment of time and capital by individuals and small businesses, which are the real job creators.  As Dr. Arthur Laffer points out  (and we have previously), higher rates often fail to generate the revenue envisioned.  The Laffer Curve demonstrates that higher rates can become counterproductive, incentivizing taxpayers to engage in creative measures to reduce their taxable income, and disincentivizing growth.

In Part Two, we will look at the other side of the Fiscal Cliff equation: indiscriminate spending cuts that will leave our national defense in a state of disrepair despite the tumult we see in the world around us.

Posted in Economy, Government, Taxes | Tagged | Leave a comment

Motor City Quid Pro Quo Mr. President?

A Detroit City Council member apparently believes that President Obama should help bail out Detroit given its current disastrous economic situation.  Not only that, she actually says he should do it as payback for the support city residents gave to him in his recent re-election.

On Tuesday, Council Member JoAnn Watson said,

“Our people in an overwhelming way supported the re-election of this president and there ought to be a quid pro quo and you ought to exercise leadership on that.”

In reference to the former long-time Mayor of Detroit and Democratic Party Chairman from 1977-1981, Watson said,

 “After the election of Jimmy Carter, the honorable Coleman Alexander Young, he went to Washington, D.C. He came home with some bacon.”

While there are indications Detroit could run out of money by the end of the year, the White House has thus far not indicated it will bail out the Motor City.

 

Posted in Local Government | Tagged , , | Leave a comment