Ohio stimulus dollars

I received a press release the other day from the Ohio Republican Party talking about how Ohio has spent its so-called 'stimulus dollars.'

From the release:

As a follow-up to Vice President Joe Biden's visit to Dayton on Monday, we thought it would be helpful to look at where Ohio's "stimulus" dollars are being spent:

* $1 million on road signs to tell Ohioans which highway projects were funded by federal stimulus dollars. (The Plain Dealer, 9/9/09)

* $11 million to outsource an appliance rebate program to a Texas company, which then hired workers in El Salvador. (The Plain Dealer, 7/29/10)

* $145,000 to rent "marble-clad" banquet halls, high-end hotels and conference centers for teacher workshops in Columbus. (Columbus Dispatch, 12/6/09)

* $1.4 million to pay speakers at a Columbus City Schools workshop, including thousands of dollars to a company owned by the former school board president. (Columbus Dispatch, 12/6/09)

* $800,000 for "quiet zones" in North Ridgeville, OH, where the mayor admits the project is "a long way from the top priority." (The Chronicle Telegram, 5/22/09)

* $63,000 for the Ohio Department of Agriculture to buy fish food. (CNN, 1/25/10)

* $4.5 million for Cleveland City Schools to provide "family liaisons" that help parents "find their way through the school district bureaucracy." (The Plain Dealer, 11/06/09)

* Unknown amount of funds to fix curbs on Gov. Strickland's street, which a local TV station calls "one of the most prestigious areas of Central Ohio where million-dollar mansions sit secluded behind well manicured landscaping." (WCMH-Columbus, 8/27/10)

* $500,000 for a consultant to design a recycling campaign for new trash cans in Dayton that use "microchips to track citizen participation." (Dayton Daily News, 2/11/10)

* $300,000 to open and operate a city-owned pool in Youngstown. (Vindicator, 6/12/10)

* $200,000 for a Toledo ship museum to remove asbestos from a 1911 ship. (Fox Toledo, 7/22/10)

* $336,000 to collect and document flowers and plants in Ohio. (WCMH-Columbus, 8/5/10)

* $267 million for home weatherization projects in Ohio, 40 percent of which later failed state inspection. (Columbus Dispatch, 3/14/10)

* $1.5 million to install fencing on an Akron bridge to keep people from jumping. (Akron Beacon Journal, 3/27/09)

Now, I understand how some people might think that government spending creates jobs - but every historical, empirical, objective evaluation of such spending shows it can only 'create' temporary jobs - not the kind of economic growth that is necessary to sustain a turn-around.

And if having the government pay people to work actually was such a good thing, we could employ half the unemployed by giving them a spoon and telling them to dig a whole while employing the other half to fill it. There's no economic growth in doing that.

And many of these types of projects are similar. They take money from the people actually paying taxes and spend it on 'make work' projects or on things that the federal government shouldn't be paying for.

What a warped system we have. We 'rejoice' and politicians 'brag' about getting this money only to find that it ends up costing us more in the long run. How much additional money would I have in my pocket if I wasn't helping to pay for pools in Youngstown, recycling advertising programs in Dayton (not to mention in addition to the huge trash tax I'm paying in Toledo), liaisons at Cleveland schools, curbs at the governor's mansion or fish food. And how much money would I have for weatherizing my home if I weren't helping to pay for everyone else to do the same?

This is a failed logic and I hope the majority of voters are going to vote against such programs and politicians who support such programs. And that non-voters realize what's going on and begin to vote.

Bogus jobs numbers in the stimulus & Ohio phantom congressional districts

The Washington Examiner has been compiling various news reports about the bogus numbers of jobs 'created or retained' by the stimulus funds.

In their spreadsheet, they even list a Toledo example:

Koring Group reported hiring 52 people, but it turns out that they double-counted jobs that “only lasted about two months.” The FCC estimates that “actual job count is closer to five.”

But this got me thinking about two items I saw on the November 10th Council agenda:

608-09
Accept ARRA Stimulus grant for prosecutor and intern for crimes of Violence Against Women,$40,193
Passed

614-09
Accept ARRA Stimulus grant for retention of jobs in Prosecutor's Office, $93,724
Passed

These positions have been funded in the past by Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) grant dollars and Justice Assistance Grants (JAG) and/or Byrne Memorial grant funds.

So these are not new positions in the Prosecutor's office.

But, they are now funded by ARRA - the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act - and I can't help but wonder if they are part of the number of jobs 'created or saved' being claimed by government.

Certainly, since they are existing positions, they are not jobs 'created.' If these old grants had not been replaced (renamed?) by ARRA, it is likely they would have continued, so I don't know that we can say the jobs were 'saved.'

I still take exception to the 'saved' category, as any job that isn't eliminated could be claimed by the government as one 'saved,' regardless of any action of or by the government.

But that point aside - are jobs like these in the Prosecutor's office included in the claim? I couldn't tell by looking at the Recovery.gov website, which is supposed to track the stimulus funds.

Interestingly, though, I did find two curious expenditures at Recovery.gov:

$25,000 awarded on Aug. 12, 2009 as a sub-grant to TOLEDO ORCHESTRA ASSOCIATION INC.

$250,000 awarded July 1, 2009 to the Arts Commission of Greater Toledo - "To support the preservation of jobs that are threatened by declines in philanthropic and other support duringt he current economic downturn, as described in application A09-904015 and the approved project budget."

Remember - the Arts Commission gets funding directly from the citizens as part of the City of Toledo's 'set-aside' for the arts. In 1977, Toledo City Council passed the 'One Percent for Art' program, which takes 1% of the capital improvement budget and spends it on art in public places each year.

And the number of jobs identified with these two programs? So far, only 2 for the $603,400 total in funds that the state and/ or city received.

Additionally Ohio has 18 Congressional districts, but Recovery.gov shows that money was spent in 9 Ohio districts that don't even exist! In fact, $3,438,956 in stimulus funds went somewhere - and there were even 3 jobs associated with those funds.

Congressional District # of jobs $ amount
21st congressional district 3 $1,241,652
99th congressional district 0 $660,000
69th congressional district 0 $400,000
87th congressional district 0 $336,108
85th congressional district 0 $250,000
49th congressional district 0 $230,000
20th congressional district 0 $208,836
54th congressional district 0 $100,000
56th congressional district 0 $12,000

And people think this same government can handle health care on behalf of every American?????

The bigger problem with this whole fiasco is that government only has what it takes from us. In order to have the money to spend to 'save or create' jobs, it has to tax us (or our descendants) or borrow and then, eventually, tax us to repay the loans. By doing this, they are removing our money from the economy and putting it toward their pet projects. If we'd been allowed to keep our money in the first place, we'd be investing it, spending it, and/or saving it, resulting in a better and more efficient use of the funds - which would result in a better economy meeting the needs of the consumers, rather than the wants of politicians.

For a better understanding of this concept, read Henry Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson" - Chapter Two: The Broken Window (may take a moment to download and Chapter Two starts on page 17 of the .pdf). Better yet, give a copy of the chapter to our elected officials and ask them why, in light of the lesson, they continue to do the wrong things.

For more information on how the stimulus funds are being distributed in Ohio, be sure to read Ohio Watchdog and check out their information showing the jobs 'created' in our 9th Congressional district cost over $467,000 each - and that the majority of spending has been to government entities, including the City of Toledo (roughly $23 million), the University of Toledo (rougly $45 million) and Toledo Public Schools (roughly $40 million).

I sure do hope TPS doesn't ask for a levy any time soon.

Stimulus funds - where's the cheese?

Interesting...

According to Recovery.gov, the Department of Agriculture has awarded MICELI DAIRY PRODUCTS COMPANY in Cleveland, $1,562,568 for "mozzarella cheese."

That's a LOT of cheese!

According to the company's website, they are a family-owned and -operated cheese manufacturer that specializes in ricotta - "a national leader in ricotta production and the entire Italian cheese industry." They also make mozzarella.

According to a press release issued by the USDA, the cheese (and other food products) were purchased by the government for distribution to food banks and other entities that feed the needy, like food pantries and soup kitchens. They purchased 837,936 pounds of mozzarella cheese.

Raiding funds for Strickland's nebulus 'stimulus'

Legislators in Columbus proved they CAN act quickly when they want to. Yesterday they voted to move tobacco funds out of the foundation which administers them so that the foundation couldn't transfer the money to non-profits out of the reach of state government.

And now it begins...the bickering, scrambling and maybe even court battles over who gets to decide how to spend the money.

Perhaps I'm really off-base, but I thought the whole purpose of the lawsuit against the tobacco companies by the states was to ensure that future medical costs from this 'addiction' would be paid for by the companies and not the state - hence the huge settlement.

But the money has been diverted to other general fund purposes and spent on huge anti-smoking campaigns with little notice of how much of it is actually going toward medical bills.

And how much money does the state really need for anti-smoking campaigns? Do they really need $270 million for this??? That's the amount that was in the account prior to the state's action yesterday.

The point isn't really the original intent of the funds. It's all about who gets to decide - and, as yesterday's vote shows, those in Columbus think they know best. Never mind that this so-called 'stimulus' will do little to stimulate the economy.

In my WSPD interview with Jon Husted, he explains that other states are doing these kinds of 'stimulus' projects, so Ohio has to follow their lead.

If elected officials in Columbus really want to stimulate the economy, they'd reduce government spending, reduce government taxation, reduce government regulation and make Ohio a 'right-to-work' state. If they're really interested in duplicating what other states do, they should at least follow in the steps of the ones that are successful!

Can government really 'stimulate' the economy?

Gov. Ted Strickland, in his state of the state address, called for $1.7 billion in state spending to 'stimulate' the economy. Yesterday, along with House Speaker Jon Husted and Senate President Bill Harris (Republicans), he announced a revised plan for $1.57 billion - but with less reliance upon borrowing as a source of the funds.

SIDEBAR: Of course, most local elected officials are extremely supportive of this proposal because they see more state money flowing to their jurisdictions to cover the costs of roads, sewers and other infrastructure projects. That their constituents are the source of the funding for these projects seems to be missed, however.
*********

One of the sources of funding for this new spending is 'excess Ohio Turnpike revenue.' In my on-air discussion with Husted yesterday on NewsTalk 1370 WSPD, I asked him why any 'excess revenue' isn't going toward reducing the tolls. I really didn't get an answer, other than it was a great question and one that would have to be debated as the proposal goes forward.

The tolls for the Ohio Turnpike, which runs across the northern portion of the state from Pennsylvania to Indiana, have been a source of contention for those who live along the roadway for a long time. Failed promises to remove the tolls once the road was paid for, raising tolls in order to keep up with expansion and maintenance, truck traffic on local roads from those avoiding the cost, and other issues all combine to make the northern portion of the state feel animosity over just about any discussion of this thoroughfare. And then there is the state law which limits Turnpike revenue usage to projects within one mile of the toll road.

Politicians in Columbus may get more than an earful over this portion of the funding, in addition others. They're already seeing opposition from the anti-smoking groups over another source: using $230 million from the state’s anti-smoking efforts, leaving $40 million in what was expected to be a $1 billion endowment. Ohio Tobacco Prevention Foundation Executive Director Mike Renner has questioned the legality of the state taking this money.

Additional sources of funding to avoid borrowing include liquor sale profits and future general tax revenue transfers. Husted's explanation was that this is not a 'perfect' agreement, but it is better than borrowing. And he's right on that point, but he misses the bigger picture.

The overall business climate of the state is not a result of a lack of government spending.

Ohio has, for several decades, tried to 'stimulate' the economy (though elected officials didn't use that term) through targeted subsidies to politically popular industries, more infrastructure spending and other various programs designed to keep people and businesses in the state. Such efforts have not been anywhere near as successful as hoped. In fact, during all these efforts, the state's standing compared to others has fallen - except in the tax burden. Recent changes in the tax structure have helped somewhat, but not enough. And that's because government is continuing to spend.

Despite the fact that government spending hasn't worked, this stimulus package is just more more of the same, even if it's based upon borrowing only $400 million (instead of the original $1.4 million) to do so. As Dr. Samuel Staley of The Buckeye Institute said of the original proposal:

"Restoring Ohio's economic vitality will be difficult. ... the key will be in creating a policy environment where broad-based entrepreneurship and business investment is welcomed and nurtured.

Ohioans already spend nearly four months working off the cost of local, state, and federal government services. With the new debt the governor wants to heap on, taxpayers are destined to add another month working for the government. This leaves fewer and fewer dollars to fuel economic growth in the private economy. That's a recipe for driving away entrepreneurship and private investment, not keeping or nurturing it."

Husted has indicated that this new plan will allow the state to spend money more quickly than the original one would have permitted. Perhaps that's part of the problem: elected officials looking at government spending to 'quickly' do something, even if those 'somethings' will not have the desired effect of actually changing the economic environment in the state. Quick fixes might be 'quick' but are rarely a true 'fix' to the problem.