Foundations and Gov't Accountability

I will be the first person to tell you how cynical I am regarding liberal foundations and their potentially pernicious effects on civic life. Certainly, the news about how a handful of liberal foundations managed to foist "campaign-finance reform" on an unsuspecting and unwilling public has only sharpened my suspicions.

Now, it looks like I will be -- in some small way -- the beneficiary of liberal foundation dollars. I am a confirmed attendee of the Oregon Public Performance Measurement Association's inaugural meeting.

Apparently, the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation is paying for the meeting. I hope that means nice sandwiches.

Come to find out, the Sloan Foundation has an entire program dedicated to increasing and improving the measurement of municipal government results. Where oh where have they been all my life? And can I trust them?

At least I'll get fed.

Egypt gets what the Democrats don't

From the 27-May-2005 Wall Street Journal:

Egyptian Finance Minister Youssef Boutros-Ghali could have been describing Argentina when he told us that under the traditional state system, "Government is a predator and the citizen is the prey. You pounce on him and you squeeze him all you can." Egypt wants to break with that tradition so as to attract capital and boost economic activity. Speaking like a Reagan supply-sider, Mr. Boutros-Ghali offered that any revenue loss under his tax plan to cut rates and provide an amnesty would be offset by higher growth and more taxpayers coming into the formal economy.

How well this describes Oregon's view of its taxpayers.

Daily 5

There are some remarkably good resources for managers on the web (as well as the expected crop of Dilbert-like crud).

The latest (for me) is something simple called the Daily Five Minutes. I like it.

What is Privacy?

Leave it to Bruce Schneier to send me this link to a definitive taxonomy of the concept of Privacy.

Brilliant.

Why I Love to Hate the OCPP

Before I thrash him here, I should say that I actually like Chuck Sheketoff. He's an excellent public speaker, which I like and admire. He's witty and thinks quickly on his feet. I recommended him to be part of a City Club of Portland panel, and he did very well. Sit next to him at dinner and you'll have a fine time.

But Chuck's political writing gets under my skin because his approach is inductive and emotional, and he uses that approach to gloss over otherwise troublesome facts. If you're looking to have your liberal prejudices reaffirmed, he's great. If you're looking to understand what's going on in detail, he's worse than useless.

Consider his recent [when I first wrote this] column regarding an apparently huge piece of corporate welfare, "Is Intel Bluffing?" - it's a masterpiece of the genre.

The public policy question is, should Intel get a huge property tax break on a planned multi-billion dollar investment? Useful related questions are, what will happen if they don't get the tax break, and what's the purpose of property taxes and of selective tax breaks? Is the (fairly common) practice of excusing very large capital investments from taxation a nod to the virtues of the Land Value Tax?

Sheketoff sidesteps all of that. To him, all taxes are just and good. There are no opportunity costs, and the hypothetical tax revenue is as good as in the bank - so the tax break "give[s] away $579 million of property taxes that are dedicated to funding public services."

Except of course it doesn't "give away" what it hasn't collected yet, and the whole question is, will Intel make a huge multi-billion dollar investment in Oregon if Oregon is planning to tax that investment to the tune of half a billion dollars? More pointedly, what are Intel's other options, and how likely is it that another location (Arizona, for example) might waive the tax if Oregon doesn't, and thus get the investment?

I think the whole subject of local governments competing with tax breaks and giveaways to lure jobs is fascinating. I'm convinced most of it is stupid; it's often a zero-sum game where tax dollars get spent to shuffle existing jobs between cities and states, and the firms that aren't threatening to move find that their taxes are being used to subsidize their competitors.

Here too, Sheketoff can't give us any facts, just innuendo mixed with irrelevant statistics.

[Postscript - Sheketoff won by getting the tax break killed, and Intel did NOT invest in Oregon. Perhaps that was his goal all along - to chase away those pesky jobs that make people independent of their government, and keep as many people unemployed and downtrodden as possible.]

My Soul Brother

I love this guy, Ted Hayes. Not for being a black Republican, though that's no bad thing, but for believing in personal responsibility and for personally making a difference.

Right on.

Risk and the Capitalists' Carnival

Here's a rich page I need to go back and study: Political Calculations. And another: Peaktalk on the Carnival of the Capitalists.

Potter's Dishonesty

(edited 4/27)
Potter's Dishonesty

I've asked a national security expert about Potter and his desire for a Secret Decoder Ring and a Top Secret clearance.

Does Potter actually need Top Secret clearance in order to oversee the police?

According to my source, no - in fact it is common for lower level workers to have more access to sensitive information than their bosses. There are any number of ways to maintain accountability and oversight in such cases, which Potter surely must know.

For the lay audience, try this thought experiment. Instead of Top Secret information, what if Potter were overseeing staff who spoke a language he didn't speak? What if he were overseeing people with expertise in accounting, or computer programming? Would he need to learn that foreign language, or get an accounting degree, in order to manage his staff?

No. Any time a boss has to oversee people in such cases, he needs to set clear policy, needs to require his subordinates to commit in writing to obeying that policy, and needs to audit compliance and give feedback. Period.

This "oversight and accountability" argument is a smokescreen, and needs to be revealed as such. To the extent this "pullout" affects policing, Potter is putting public safety second to political posturing.

SB 1000

Finally, the Democrats have something to offer me. Under the proposed new laws outlined in SB 1000, I can benefit personally from quotas and set-asides just by swearing I'm bisexual or occasionally wearing a skirt.

If Milton Berle can wear a dress on national TV, I can wear one on Cross Dressing Fridays to pay my bills.

I'm a size 8.

The Pope gets it Right on Socialism

It worries me when religious people embrace the thoroughly evil ideas of Socialism. So I was pleased to read this column in which the late Pope is shown to have opposed Socialism, and for excellent reasons.