Choice for This But Not for That
Hand-wringing over so-called suburban sprawl is not just a U.S. phenomenon. It's also the latest social experiment in Canada, country with even more land but fewer people than the U.S. You might think that sprawl would not be an issue there. You'd be wrong.

Brian Lee Crowley, president of the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies in Halifax, Nova Scotia, finds it exasperating that choice is the watchword of the world today, except when it comes to housing. There, all many of regulators and would-be regulators are determined to make sure that other people live in apartments, townhouses, or houses on smaller lots.

He writes in part:

In a world in which you get your medications without prescription over the Internet, in which you can choose your profession, your mate, your sexual orientation, your reproductive timetable, your music, your religion and your political philosophy, the notion that somebody gets to dictate arbitrarily how big a lot you can have for your house or where you can build, is ludicrous and unnecessary. Yes, make developers and their customers pay the costs of the choices they make and services they consume. That done, there is little reason to second-guess their decisions of where to build and live.
(permalink)

The Benefits of School Choice Keep Rolling In
In an editorial today, the WSJ says that "Florida has delivered real school choice to more American schoolchildren than anywhere else in the country."

As the editorial outlines, the state has three different options for families seeking the choice that is readily available for other services (even, with tax dollars, food stamps or college tuition). Opportunity Scholarships are available to students in failing schools. McKay Scholarships go to special-ed students, and corporations can get tax credits for contributing to scholarship funds. (Arizona has a similar program).

For his trouble, Governor Jeb Bush gets to see his policies labeled as "racist" by (who else) Jesse Jackson.

Meanwhile, a foundation established by the man who pioneered the simple yet revolutionary idea of school choice, Milton Friedman, recently issued a report card on the climate for school choice.

The report measures student eligibility (who can exercise choice); school eligibility (where can families spend the money) and the purchasing power of their school-of-choice option. "Ranking Vouchers" is available on the web site of the Milton and Rose D. Friedman Foundation in PDF format.
(permalink)

States Can Bar Local Telecom Socialism
The Supreme Court has ruled that states can bar local governments from operating commercial phone systems--telecom socialism if you will.

Missouri cities sued the state after it passed a law prohibiting the practice. They argued that the Telecommunications Act of 1996, with the stated goal of promoting competition, enabled them to operate their own systems in competition with the monopoly local operator SBC.

Except SBC isn't exactly a monopoly anymore. If you want a land line, that is true in many cases. But with the growth of cellular service and cable broadband telephony, that's not as true as it used to be.

In any case, the answer to promoting even more competition in communications lies not in having government enter into a commercial enterprise for which there are commercial operators. That's socialism, and beyond the proper scope of government.

As for rural areas (I suspect many of the parties of the suit were rural cities), well, them's the breaks. Tradtionally, living in less densely populated areas means less choice and service in everything from movie screens and restaurants to retail outlets and physicians. To some extent this is changing. Some of my relatives who live in a lightly populated county now have broadband, practically unheard of anywhere 10 years ago.
(permalink)

Michigan Lawmaker Objects to Raising Cigarette Tax
Michigan lawmakers hope to fetch more state revenue by raising the tax on cigarettes. Smokers are easy target, but the chairman of an important committee says he's opposed. Here's hoping they actually use the occasion to consider some advice from the Mackinac Center. More in an entry I posted to the Political State Report.
(permalink)

Medicaid Scammers: We Told You So
Governments are keen to prevent the proliferation of schemes--except when one level of government is trying to scheme another.

Recently the Illinois Policy Institute warned against a proposal in the Land of Lincoln to game the Medicaid system (PDF link here). In short, the state taxes hospitals, who pass along the cost, ultimately to people with insurance. In turn, the federal government gives Illinois more Medicaid money, which is then turned over to the hospitals. It's all an attempt to keep the creaky government-run program going, rather than change it fundamentally by using market forces.

Now the federal government is questioning state schemes, in a report carried by the Birmingham (AL) News. Among the practices under question: diverting federal money intended for health care to other purposes. (Wouldn't this be called a case of fraud if a non-profit organization did this?)

Each state has some unique problems with Medicaid, but there are some interesting proposals in Ohio that could be adapted by other states.
(permalink)

To Protect a Few, Make Everyone Pay More. A Lot More.
30 million Americans have hearing loss, and it's the third-leading chronic condition among the elderly. Hearing aids cost an average of $2,200, putting them out of reach for some. Why so expensive? Blame government regulations and private interest.

Hearing aid sales were largely unregulated until the mid-1970s. A U.S. Senate committee found some shysters who sold people some aids that were not working, or inappropriate. The result was the Hearing Aid Rule of 1977. The Rule, a regulation imposed by the FDA, makes the sale of hearing aids conditional on a visit to a doctor (hearing loss is common in aging, five percent of cases stem from a medical problem), or a consultation with a state-licensed hearing-aid dispenser.

The result of the requirements? It costs a lot more to get a hearing aid, since the state-empowered specialists have to spent a lot of money to get certified. Says one specialist recently retired from Harvard: "The technology can be made for hundreds of dollars; the rest is distribution."

And what sweet distribution it is. The requirements have proven to be quite useful to audiologists, who must have at least a master's degree.

Dr. Mead Killion, who holds a patent for circuitry used in most of today's hearing aids. He believes there is a place for the high-priced models, but says that the consultation requirements are inappropriate for most people. A Stanford professor agrees, saying "IF the FDA does not require the public to see a doctor to rule out glaucoma or other diseases before getting reading glasses, why does it do so for hearing aids?"

Killion petitioned the FDA to waives its rule. He argues that warning labels will suffice, and that people are smart enough to make the decision on their own. What's more, he argues, the rule is regressive, pricing the devices out of reach for low-income people. (Left untreated, hearing loss is linked to depression, anxiety, and paranoia.)

For his trouble, Killion has been assaulted by his fellow audiologists. Some ask why he wants to destroy their line of work; one has said he is filled with "money hungry folly." Bear in mind, of course, that these objections come from people whose income benefits not from the freely-made choices of people who wish to consult a professional for a hearing aid fitting, but from a government regulation that effectively creates demand for their services.

Professional self-interest and a desire to regulate every possible transaction that could ever go wrong. What a combination.
(permalink)

Family Doctors Prescribe Antipsychotics: More Trouble for Drug Companies?
Three years ago, general physicians, rather than psychiatrists wrote 17 percent of prescriptions for drugs known as atypical antipsychotics. Today it's slightly over 30 percent. Two drug companies encourage the practice by funding educational seminars for doctors, a practice one academic psychiatrist calls "not good medicine." (Wall Street Journal, paid access only)

This brings about the classic dilemma of our health care system, especially its third-party payer orientation: increased treatment of previously treated illnesses is generally a good thing. But who's going to pay for it? (Remember, he who has the gold makes the rules.)

Another question: will this trend bring an overall increase, or decrease to health care spending? There may be some slight decrease in spending on professional visits, if consumers get their scripts from the family MD during a routine visit (rather than make a separate trip to a psychiatrist).

It's also likely that this trend will encourage spending on this class of drugs. This spending may, however, save money down the road if it allows more people to live more economically productive lives or avoid other medical care caused by illness-induced behavior.
(permalink)

Tobacco Settlement Money Diverted
The states went after Big Tobacco, claiming they needed more money for health care programs, as well as to discourage smoking. Pardon the pun, but the General Accounting Office has put those claims up in smoke.

As the GAO says in this summary, "The Master Settlement Agreement allows states to use their tobacco settlement payments for any purpose." And "any purpose" is right; over one-third went to general spending purposes in 2003, and that number is expected to reach over one-half in this fiscal year.

The percentage spent on health, meanwhile, is expected to decline from 24 percent to 17 percent for the same two years.

It would seem that the GAO has confirmed the cynicism of critics years ago, who warned that the tobacco raid was simply a plan to get more money, and avoid the hard tasks of doing less with less.
(permalink)

California: Insurance Mandate May be Repealed
A new initiative measure to repeal government-dictated health insurance is underway.

Last year, the California Assembly enacted a proposal to require employer-sponsored health insurance for all companies with over 50 employees. (Guess how many businesses with 49 employees will try hard to avoid having to hire that 50th employee?)

Costs of the measure range from $1.5 billion to $11.5 billion, depending on whom you believe. Here's a hint: advocates of increased mandates and programs tend to overstate the benefits and understate the costs of their plans. Naturally, opponents do the opposite, but my money is with them.

Health Care News reported back in January that Governor Schwarznegger will lend his support to terminating the law.

This classic brief from the National Center for National Analysis explains why such a mandate is a job-killer.
(permalink)

Air Quality: It's Getting Better
With traffic congestion a regular topic of complaint in metropolitan areas, it's easy to assume that air quality is getting worse. Wrong.

PIRG (the group started by Ralph Nader) is wrong about many things, including the desirability of automobiles. Their latest report calls on governments to "curtail the growth of vehicle travel," citing pollution concerns.

Joel Schwartz dissects PIRG's report here. My favorite parts: "even with a tripling of driving [since 1970], technological improvements in vehicle emissions control reduced total emissions by 70 percent.... PIRG's fanciful claims not withstanding, technology will continue to win the battle against air pollution without the need to restrict people's travel choices."

Schwartz also takes on PIRG's advocacy of mass transit: "Rather than pursue the "public interest," PIRG seeks to override Americans' preferences."
(permalink)

Google is Great, but ...
More than a few people could have saved themselves some trouble caused by a con artist had they did more than google him. So says a story in the New York Post, which reports that Shamoon "Sam" Rafiq snared nearly $3 million in ill-gotten gains. People who searched for information on him on Google came up with no dirty laundry. Only when you searched for him with other engines, such as Teoma and All the Web, did you find information that may have raised some red flags.
(permalink)