Before we get into the weekend theme of market solutions and privatization...
Checking out the local Somewhere, Colorado, paper for the latest on fugitive Norman Hsu, I found this the lead story:
A lesson in telling the difference between fiction and nonfiction was the source of alarm for third-graders at Clifton Elementary School who were told by their teacher on Thursday that characters such as Santa Claus and the tooth fairy do not exist.
— "Santa lesson upsets kids, sparks ire of parents," Grand Junction Daily Sentinel
*****
Privatization of highway construction/repair has been getting some play in the conservative blogosphere — partly to counter calls for tax increases in the wake of the I-35W bridge collapse. And, as I point out in a post at the Growth & Justice blog, privatization is an avowed strategy of the Bush Transportation Department.
That doesn't necessarily Minnesota should run screaming in the other direction. Another post by Dane Smith says market mechanisms have pitfalls, but they're worth a closer look.
*****
On the other hand, A Bluestem Prairie has a long post about how flooding in southern Minnesota is being dealt with — or not — by the governor and legislature. House Bonding Committee members were meeting in Rushford, when the governor blew in and out of town, appearing more interested in striking out at the legislature than calling a special session to address flood aid.
Locals have had it up to their knees and are looking for state action:
"I hope the committee members will get off the bus and look inside these homes and businesses to see the Herculean-effort that's been made here already to clean-up from the flood," interjected former Mayor Ted Roberton, "We haven't been sitting around on our hands waiting for help to arrive. But I think we've done about all we can do. We need help."
However, Margaret Martin writing at the Minnesota Free Market Institute (MFMI) seems to imply private efforts are filling the gap.
When disasters happen, government help is needed to strengthen and rebuild civil authority and but the recovery and rebuilding process is best accomplished when private individuals come to support the efforts of those in need, to help get their lives and their livelihoods back on track.
Bluestem and Minnesota Observer see Martin's praise of non-government aid as simply a way of putting lipstick on the no new taxes/no special session message of the MFMI and Taxpayers League. With one local legislator calling for a $100-million aid package, and Gov. Pawlenty talking about directing $32 million in aid, it's hard to see how the roughly $1 million in private donations the MFMI totes up is "best" accomplishing anything.
Closed businesses and destroyed homes don't just disrupt lives and the local economy. They play havok with the tax base. More services than normal are demanded at the same time municipal revenues that depend on the local economy and property taxes drop.
*****
I checked out a report on Minnesota's charitable giving, just to get an idea of private charitable capacity to solve the state's flooding.
According to the latest figures available, individual Minnesotans gave an estimated $3.9 billion in 2004 — about 78% of all philanthropic giving in the state. According to The Boston Foundation's Geography and Giving study in 2003, Minnesotans gave 2.78% of their after-tax incomes, adjusted for cost of living differences among states. Nearly 75% of that giving went to religious organizations.
Roughly speaking, then, Minnesota's current secular charitable capacity is $1 billion each from individuals and foundation/corporate giving. No doubt, some religious charity could also be directed to flood relief. But that's only one new challenge for private giving to solve. And remember, this is giving to all charities, not just those in Minnesota.
I don't want to get all numbers heavy on the weekend. But do you really think private giving would take up the slack in government services created by tax cuts or redirecting funds to other priorities such as transportation infrastructure?
The fact is, philanthrophy is admirable and helpful, but it's no way to run a state or a nation.
