Category: porkbarrel politics

Categories
Accountability Common Sense insider corruption porkbarrel politics too much government

Waterboarding Term Limits

Here’s a story about a government board whose members endlessly dish out taxpayer money. And want endless years in power to keep doing so.

Recently, members of the Santa Clara water board approved steep salary hikes for two of their staffers, making them the highest-​paid for their jobs in all of California. For example, the water district attorney will get an 8‑percent hike so that she now pulls down $221,720 a year. Well, not exactly. She also got a $12,000 bonus. Then there’s her monthly car allowance: $750.

Yikes. Guess I’m in the wrong line of work.

Interestingly, the board doled out these huge hikes right after refusing to consider a proposal to let voters consider term-​limiting board members. These antics are a strong argument for privatizing the water industry, frankly. Short of that, these guys definitely need to be term-limited.

It’s not exactly a secret in Santa Clara that the town’s water board is lavish with its budget. A spate of critical stories made the rounds of California papers after the board’s latest twirl of the financial spigot. As one reporter notes, the board has been “buffeted by charges of excessive spending.”

But you know, there’s buffeting and there’s buffeting. Trust me, any kind of buffeting that leaves incumbents in place to continue their exploitative fun and games is not enough buffeting.

Oh, forget “buffeting”! I’ll take term limits.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets national politics & policies porkbarrel politics too much government

Nifty Doesn’t Cut It

Just because something can be done doesn’t make it economical to do. There is a big difference between physics and economics.

Take ethanol. It might seem nifty to grow the fuel for our cars and trucks like we do our food, in fields. But niftiness alone is not enough. Nifty notions, like un-nifty ones, must prove out in terms of all the costs involved.

A growing amount of research shows that ethanol doesn’t cut costs at all.

The most recent ethanol debunker I’ve come across is Robert Bryce, author of a forthcoming book with a provocative title, Gusher of Lies: The Dangerous Delusions of “Energy Independence.” Interviewed on ReasonOnline by Brian Doherty, Bryce offers some fascinating perspectives on energy economics and policies.

  • Did you know that for every gallon of ethanol, there’s at least 51 cents of subsidy?
  • Had you heard that corn-​based ethanol produces more greenhouse gases than does our use of fossil fuels?
  • Have you stopped to think about all the water that raising more corn would require, and the increasing expense of getting gargantuan more amounts to farms in the midwest?

These and other considerations lead Robert Bryce to call current ethanol policy a “scam”and “the longest running robbery of taxpayers in American history.”

Some forms of bio-​product may be more economically feasible than ethanol, like the biodiesel made from the unused parts of slaughtered animals. But we should wait to see how they cost out, too, without subsidy.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.