Category: Taxes

AT&T’s Rhetoric on Competition

Posted on by

Mark Pitsch:

Wisconsin residents would lose their rights to cable television repairs within 72 hours, credit for service interruptions and advance notice of rate increases, under a bill on the fast track in the state Legislature.

The proposal, designed to increase competition in an industry dominated by cable companies, is supported by the lobbying muscle of telecommunications giant AT&T.

It’s part of AT&T’s challenge to cable companies such as Charter Communications, which are licensed by local governments.

There is little agreement on whether the proposal would help consumers or hurt them.

Pitsch mentions this:

But proponents say the bill would lower costs for telecast delivery – whether by cable or AT&T’s fiber optic lines – by up to 23 percent by introducing competition and deregulating the industry.

What fiber optic lines would that be? AT&T has done nothing to upgrade it’s copper based network to the home (other than spend money on lobbying and advertisements regarding the ongoing resale of the old network, something we’ve paid for over and over and over…), unlike Verizon in other parts of the country. Nice to see our politicians continue to “stick it to us”. `

Some Good Reasons for Governments NOT to invest Taxpayer Money in Schemes

Posted on by

Richard Aboulafia:

Finding Two. If a state plays this game it quickly reaches an absurd level. Just after the LoPresti micro-triumph New Mexico announced a $100 million investment to build…a spaceport (I really wish I was making this up). This will service Richard Branson’s Virgin Galactic and is obviously a necessary subsidy, because Branson, for some reason, has no cash. (See the December 2005 press release at http://ww1.edd.state.nm.us. Title: Richardson Announces $100 Million Commitment to Build World’s First Spaceport. Implicit subtitles: “Private Sector Baulks At Risky Project; We’re enlisting New Mexico Taxpayers To Provide Generous Help” and “Hooray! We’re Morons!”). Today, Kansas and Florida. Tomorrow, Low Earth Orbit. Who can stop New Mexico from operating like an aerospace banana republic? In search of good government I asked my friend Jeff Schwartz what could be done. Jeff is one of the smartest government guys I know, and he works for the Appalachian Regional Commission, which funds development work in states in their jurisdiction. “We’re on it,” he reassured me, referring me to their code (http://www.arc.gov/index.do?nodeId=1242#chap8). The ARC prohibits its money from going to “(A) Any form of assistance to relocating industries; (B) recruitment activities that place a state in competition with another state or states; and (C) projects that promote unfair competition between businesses within the same immediate service area.”

Brenda Konkel recently wondered about the City of Madison’s $700K loan to Tomo Therapy. Generally, I think governments should stay out of this. We’re all better off if they spend time simplifying processes, taxes and paperwork.

Google’s Arrogance in North Carolina: Learning from AT&T?

Posted on by

Ed Cone:

But it turns out that there was a lot more to the story. Google leaned hard on North Carolina lawmakers and officials, not just to get the fattest deal possible but to choke off the flow of information along the way.


According to documents obtained by The News & Observer of Raleigh, the company went beyond reasonable expectations of confidentiality to demand absolute secrecy while negotiations were under way, even asking participants to sign nondisclosure agreements; some legislators and local officials did so, but Department of Commerce officials did not. Google executive Rhett Weiss badgered Commerce Secretary Jim Fain about the state’s adherence to process, complaining, for example, when lawmakers wanted an estimate of the cost to North Carolina in lost tax revenue, and threatening to kill the whole thing if Google didn’t get its way.


Businesses need some measure of confidentiality when putting together this kind of transaction. Fair enough. But this is the people’s business, and Google’s high-handedness is an affront to the people of this state.


And then there’s that whole “Don’t be evil” thing. Google spokesman Barry Schnitt told me that the company’s negotiations with the state were “very standard.” If that’s the case, and this is standard operating procedure for the company, then something has gone wrong in Silicon Valley.

Barry Orton keeps up with AT&T’s Wisconsin Lobbying.

Yet another reason to use the excellent Clusty search engine.

Gasoline and the American People

Posted on by

Cambridge Energy Research Associates:

America’s “love affair with the automobile” is being transformed — but not broken up — by forces that are redrawing the global gasoline and oil market, including higher gasoline prices, tightening environmental requirements, changing demographics, growing world oil demand and expanding fuel options, according to the new 2007 edition of Gasoline and the American People, by Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA).

Americans have been driving further — 40% more than 25 years ago — and using more gasoline in bigger, more powerful cars and other light duty vehicles. But higher gasoline prices have had a significant impact. The rate of growth in gasoline demand slowed sharply from its 1.6% per year pace (1990-2004) to 0.3% in 2005, and continued to grow slowly in 2006, at 1.0%. And for the first time in 25 years, motorists’ average mileage went down. Overall, though, according to the CERA report, improved automotive efficiencies and one of the lowest fuel tax rates among Western countries have kept gasoline and oil’s share of average U.S. household budgets at 3.8% in 2006, slightly above the 1960s’ 3.4% to 3.6% level despite rising world oil prices.

Media coverage.

Ed Wallace has more.

Ethanol: Very, Very Big Corn

Posted on by

Opinion Journal:

President Bush made a big push for alternative fuels in his State of the Union speech Tuesday night, calling on Americans to reduce gasoline consumption by 20% over 10 years. And as soon as the sun rose on Wednesday, he set out to tour a DuPont facility in Delaware to tout the virtues of “cellulosic ethanol” and propose $2 billion in loans to promote the stuff. For a man who famously hasn’t taken a drink for 20 years, that’s a considerable intake of alcohol.
A bit of sobriety would go a long way in discussing this moonshine of the energy world, however. Cellulosic ethanol–which is derived from plants like switchgrass–will require a big technological breakthrough to have any impact on the fuel supply. That leaves corn- and sugar-based ethanol, which have been around long enough to understand their significant limitations. What we have here is a classic political stampede rooted more in hope and self-interest than science or logic.

I’m Opposed to a $30M Wisconsin Medical Records Subsidy

Posted on by

Sandy Cullen:

A proposal by Gov. Jim Doyle to spend $30 million to help fund electronic medical records systems is just a “drop in the bucket” of what it would take to enable all of the state’s health-care providers to access patients’ histories at the push of a button, medical experts said.

Doyle said Thursday that he wants to create a $20 million grant program to help nonprofit organizations transition from paper documents to technology he says will reduce medical errors and improve quality.

Another $10 million in tax credits would go to for-profit hospitals and doctors to help cover the cost of their transition.

Cullen’s article rightly points out that the “$30M is a drop in the bucket” in a system with billions flowing through it (I don’t think they need a subsidy). Creating another layer of tax redistribution (from payroll and income taxes and fees) for state incentives and health care system funding, given the many other state spending priorities, not to mention the $1.6B structural deficit, is misquided. I wonder who is behind this?

Link Hoewing discusses electronic medical records from Verizon’s perspective (Verizon is installing Fiber broadband to the home in many markets, unlike AT&T).

The Utility of Asking Questions

Posted on by

Ed Wallace finds some answers:

It seems to me that we might actually be standing at a crossroads of history, and 50 years from now historians will either be writing about the genius of our current plans or bemoaning our utter foolishness. But one thing is for sure. Hoping that things calm down in Iraq, wondering if they are going to get that oil law on the books and praying that the government holds and favors Western oil firms does not sound like a realistic energy policy for the United States.

Everything could go right for us; and the Chinese and Russians could still get back their Iraqi oil contracts, which were abrogated after we invaded that country.

Or we can develop a new energy policy for America. Raise the fuel efficiency standards for automobiles (mid to long-term positive results). Slow down the traffic on our Interstates (immediate impact on the amount of oil we use). Quit using so much oil for fertilizers and plastics and so trim all the waste those industries produce. Tune up our vehicles to maximize fuel economy. And determine whether General Motors’ series hybrid electric is credible, and figure the odds of Detroit’s inventing the lithium-ion batteries that would make the Chevrolet Volt feasible. The subsequent fall in the price of oil would deprive many who detest us of the funding their anti-American plans would require.

If GM’s 150-mpg Chevrolet Volt were coming to market this spring, would that breakthrough stop the 21,500 troops headed for Iraq? Probably not. But it would stop 500,000 American troops from heading to the Middle East a decade from now.

Hype & the Denver International Airport

Posted on by

I heard the hype while living in Denver nearly 20 years ago. $2.5 billion (turned into $5 billion) was necessary to avoid all of the current airport’s problems during snowstorms. Mayer Federico Pena lead the charge with his reward coming later – the highway to the new airport (DIA) is named “Pena Boulevard”.

Mike Boyd tells the “rest of the story” in the Grinch Comes Clean:

“All Weather Airport? Oh, That Was Just ‘Hype’…” …Along With Most Of The Other Stuff DIA PromisThis Christmas, it wasn’t just chestnuts that got roasted on an open fire.
Denver’s “all-weather” airport, the one that was built to unclog the Western skies, the one that was going to be the glorious technological beacon for all future airports, got roasted big-time in the national media. Justifiably.

Denver International got cooked on something called “the truth.”

For almost two days before Christmas, the airport was shut down due to snow. At most times of the year, and at most other airports, this would have been not much more than a page three human interest story, with interviews of passengers stranded like refugees in a big terminal, being asked really deep questions, like, “How long have you been standing in line?” or “When do you think you’ll get home?” Or, “Gee, you gotta lot of luggage there.” Anything to fill a 90-second piece that’s been done dozens of times before.

(more…)

TSA’s Latest: Sponsored X-Ray Bins

Posted on by

John Croft:

The US Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is launching a one-year pilot programme to allow companies to place advertisements in bins at passenger screening checkpoints at “select” US airports in return for equipment donations.

The effort follows a 3-month test programme at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) security checkpoints that started in July.

TSA is looking for commercial advertising companies who will team with an airport to provide divestiture bins (the plastic bins used to transport passenger carry-on items through the X-ray machine); divestiture and composure tables; and bin return carts free-of-charge to the TSA. In return, the companies will be allowed to place airport-approved ads “on the bottom of the inside of the bins,” says a TSA spokeswoman. Airports partnered with ad companies will ultimately be required to screen the materials for “offensive, obtrusive, political or controversial” content, she adds.

Not a bad idea, actually. How about a free bottle of water with the ad?