Share This Episode
Carolina Journal Radio Donna Martinez and Mitch Kokai Logo

Carolina Journal Radio No. 796: Legal scholars of varying philosophies support Kavanaugh

Carolina Journal Radio / Donna Martinez and Mitch Kokai
The Truth Network Radio
August 20, 2018 12:00 am

Carolina Journal Radio No. 796: Legal scholars of varying philosophies support Kavanaugh

Carolina Journal Radio / Donna Martinez and Mitch Kokai

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 213 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.

August 20, 2018 12:00 am

Legal scholars of all political stripes are assessing the relative merits of Judge Brett Kavanaugh as the next justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. Considering arguments from conservatives, libertarians, free-speech advocates, and fair-minded liberals, Jon Guze is inclined to support Kavanaugh’s nomination. Director of legal studies at the John Locke Foundation, Guze explains why assessments of experts from a range of political perspectives convince him that Kavanaugh would make a good addition to the nation’s highest court. Facebook has faced some major political blows in recent months. N.C. State University political scientist Andrew Taylor analyzes Facebook’s recent controversy and assesses its significance. Former UNC System President C.D. Spangler died recently at age 86. North Carolina’s senior U.S. senator, Richard Burr, honored Spangler with a speech in the U.S. Capitol. You’ll hear highlights from Burr’s remarks. One question drives much of the debate about college sports: Are big-time athletic programs compatible with universities’ core missions? UNC-Chapel Hill history professor Jay Smith answers no. He explained why during a recent presentation for the John Locke Foundation. Time magazine recently offered glowing praise to Georgia’s film incentive program. Jon Sanders, John Locke Foundation director of regulatory studies, says the Time article omitted key facts that would have painted a much different picture.


From Cherokee to current attack from the largest city to the smallest and from the statehouse into the schoolhouse Carolina Journal radio your weekly news magazine discussing North Carolina's most public policy events and issues welcome to Carolina Journal radio why Muskoka during the next hour, Donna Martinez and I will explore some major issues affecting our state. Facebook has faced political turmoil in recent months top political scientist from NC State University examines the social media giant and its recent problems, North Carolina's senior US Sen. recently gave a speech on Capitol Hill under a leading figure in the state higher education history here highlights speaking of higher education to learn why one Chapel Hill history professor says big-time sports programs don't mix well with universities academic missions. Plus you will hear the rest of the story when it comes to a major news magazine's recent profile of film incentives in a neighboring state.

Those topics are just a headfirst Donna Martinez joins us with the Carolina Journal headline critics of Pres. Trump's nomination of Judge Brett Cavanaugh to the US Supreme Court fear that his vote would confirm a conservative perspective on the high court. So what does Judge Cavanaugh actually believe and what can we tell from some of the opinions he's written over the years John to say is the John Locke foundation's director of legal studies. He is been analyzing some of the analysis of Judge Cavanaugh's writings. He joins us now to take a look John, welcome back to the program. I know that when it came to the nomination of Neil Gore said she now sits on the US Supreme Court. You are very familiar with his writings and opinions. Judge Cavanaugh is someone it is been on the court for what, 10, 12 years in a in a federal position right down you've been looking at some of the things that other people have written to get a general perspective of what the view is tell us about. That's right, I like Neil Corso judge. I just not familiar with Judge Cavanaugh's so he sits on the federal courts are mostly listens to a lot of here's a lot of nutritive law cases they're not the kinds of cases that make national news that I have been following the where I was following judge course. It's so hot.

I still don't know from my own personal analysis of his opinions where he stands on these issues, which is why I was pleased to see so many people I do respect coming out strongly in support of his nomination.

Having read a lot of discussion. I know feel very confident that he's going to be useful member of the court is going to be strong originalist, which is what we need their let's talk a little bit more about something you just mentioned them apparently among his opinions are quite a number of them that deal with something termed the administrative state. First of all, just a brief explanation. If you would as to what that means administrative state and what can we tell from Judge Cavanaugh's writings about that issue will probably the most significant thing at the Constitutional level. This happened in this country.

Last century is the transfer of power away from Congress to the executive branch of that's happened by way of legislation that creates administered agencies and gives them all kinds of power gives him the power to create rules which are effectively laws even though they're not legislative and it also allows them to create so-called nutritive law judges have the power to decide cases, even though they're not part of the judicial branch so this is interesting and in my opinion very unfortunate development. It's only happened because the Supreme Court series of landmark decisions has allowed it to happen, but lately there is a movement within the legal academy and among some jurors to think that this is going too far. It's time to put some limits on the extent to which Congress can delegate these kinds of powers to the executive branch is Judge Cavanaugh among the people whose writings tell us that that's what he believed. Well that's what these various scholars whose work I've been reading have said that they looked at all of his opinions and his written hundreds of and they feel that he's somebody who's very skeptical of of the extent to which Congress is delegate this power and I think he's going to support some of the other members a court like George just to score certain Justice Thomas and some of the other conservatives who will be prepared to think about reconsidering somebody's prior decisions is made this possible.

John, I know that one of the areas that you work on here at the John Mott foundation has to do with with something called mens rea, which essentially means that guilty mind and you mentioned in Judge Cavanaugh's writings and his cases about the administrative state, Calumet regulatory agencies that have been created and and and they create laws and create rules. Is there anything that comes out in the judge's writings that might give us a sense of his view on mens rea. This issue of regulatory crimes and people being responsible for things that they may not even realize that they are violating well, that's one of the things that please me the most when I started read about his history of his time on the Ninth Circuit turns out that he's actually somebody who feels that mens rea is very important just to go back one of the things that happened during the rise of the administrative regulatory state when they started creating regulatory agencies in creating rules that were effectively crimes even though they were passed by the by Congress.

Many of those rules affect most of them are what we call strict liability crimes. That means that if you do if you break the rule.

Your guilty doesn't matter whether you knew such a rule existed, it does about or whether you understood any of the terms and conditions that applied to your particular course of action. This really violates a long-standing principle of Anglo-American law, which is that you can't be guilty of a crime unless you not only committed a guilty act, but you also did so with a guilty state of mind.

I'm very pleased to read that Judge Cavanaugh thinks that mens rea is an important element that all be part of every crime, and I'm hoping he'll do something to restore this important principle down a number of analysts on the left and the right hip focused in on a dissent that judge Cavanaugh wrote in a case related to the second amendment.

Tell us about his view of the Second Amendment will again.

I've only reported secondhand what other outlaws have staff written but is consistent in almost all of these discussions is a very strong supporter of the Second Amendment. He would one of the issues that remains after the Heller case is a bit in Heller, the court decided definitely that people have a right to keep arms in their homes for the purpose of self-defense. What wasn't decided that case because it wasn't presented is do they still have to have a right to bear arms in public for personal defense by implication, it would certainly seem that if the if the Second Amendment's requirement that the people have a right to keep and bear arms applies them. They should be allowed to bear them as well as keep them and it does look as if that's something the chart. Judge Cavanaugh believes so that's very good. John is you were surveying some of the analysis by these different folks that that you trust him. Were you able to find any folks who are more left of center, who had any positive things to say about the judge or was it strictly just concerns about his more conservative views noticed justly.

People left were very enthusiastic fans of Judge Cavanaugh II included a long passage from one of those people in the the update that I thought was last week and I'm going to follow up with well over one this week that includes another effusive encomium by somebody on the left.

He's got great credentials.

He's it is a man of great integrity.

Everybody reflects and respects him in the fact that anybody's opposing this nomination is really just nonsensical. Interesting though John Denton.

Not only are there people who are opposing his nomination based on just a disagreement with with his views and things are coming out and he opinions that he's written there some people who seem to be very very emotional in their opposition to him what is going on with that it's it's the saddest factor for too long the Supreme Court has been not just apply the law they been making law and that's not their job. That's the legislature's job as long as we have courts that do more than simply interpret the laws as written is going to become emotional scar become heated and become frankly irrational any predictions on whether or not he makes it to the United States Supreme Court, barring some kind of immense scandal. I'm quite sure he's going to get confirmed and he'll be a great addition to the court. I think the writings that John has sent provided for us can be, where he has surveyed a number of different trusted analysts and people that he trusts to take a look at the opinions and the views of judge Brett Cavanaugh, who now has been nominated to a seat on the United States Supreme Court by Pres. Trump as a director of legal studies for the John Locke foundation John stay with us much more Carolina journal radio to come in just a moment government plays a key role in your life affecting your paycheck the way you educate your kids the way you do business. How can you tell if government is doing a good job making the right choices. Spending tax dollars wisely. Carolina tackles those questions every day. The John Locke foundation publishes Carolina journal in print each month and on the web each you'll find exclusive investigative reports on topics.

No one else is covering what else a rundown of the best new stories, editorials and opinion columns in North Carolina. John Hood's daily Journal news stories and important public and the voices of the newsmakers themselves. Carolina journal radio in print on the air and on the web. You can find the information you welcome back to Carolina journal radio why Michiko guy Facebook and its billionaire founder Mark Zuckerberg have faced unwanted publicity and increased congressional scrutiny in recent months. Our next guest says beyond the particulars of Facebook's recent controversy.

There's a larger theme involving entrepreneurs and their businesses. Dr. Andrew Taylor is professor of political science at North Carolina State University.

Welcome back to the program. Thanks Tammy Mitch before we get into that larger theme.

First of all, you're not saying that Facebook deserves to skate or should not get any criticism like any other corporation or individual very run-of-the-mill and actions that deemed illegal wall that obviously I did not condone unending anybody should condone.

Also don't condone assertive economic incompetence or financial incompetence. Although presumably an end as we soar immediately off the what happened to Facebook or when some of the. The news came out about how sort of fast and loose, although not illegal, they will with users privacy. There were a market there was market punishment in terms of the of the stock price and think that is perfectly good way to 244 people to respond to those kinds of behaviors so no I'm not condoning those boat as you tease my sort of point was more about how the Facebook episode tells us a lot about the way American popular opinion these days things about the role of corporations and entrepreneurs in public life. If you wrote a column about this, and Carolina journal and talked about the fact that what really struck you was not that Facebook was getting criticism but the type of criticism that it was getting what destruct he was particularly interesting here. The tone of the criticism in terms of both intensity and depth, but also the sort of proto-nature of so there is this seems to be today sort of general expectation and this is seen in the Facebook episode is is illustrative of it, but not the only example that corporations have primarily know just sort of secondary but primarily a social need that they social role to apply their basic responsibility is to the Broda general interest, whatever that is not to themselves, their employees and their shareholders. And so when a company with the visibility of someone like something like a Facebook does these kinds of things we are outraged because it does seem as though they've been doing things in their own economic self-interest and so you see that there really is that expectation of a way to move from being a sort of secondary thing that emerged that the you know, sort of as part of what they do. Corporation should have this sort of Broda understanding of of this of social collective interest to it being the Primera of the that the the number one primary responsibility that is the voice of Dr. Andrew Taylor Prof. of political science at North Carolina State University. You and I growing up in our early adult lives heard people criticize corporations because they were out to get a block and that was all that they were thinking about. And then if there was some concern about the things that they did to the environments or in relation to some sort of social because it was well these bad out to get a book.

Businesses are also doing these other bad things, but this really sorta shifts the debate. Doesn't that it did suggests that all these other things that the things that keep the business in business are secondary and playing this social role is what we really should be focusing on right exactly exactly.

And of course I spoke is in the polluter at least directly.

But he did is it's in a new game in the Marina New World here in the last 20 years in the Internet age. Of course, and so now it's primary responsibility is in terms of making us doing serving us which it needs to do by providing the services which it does for free amid this is one of things it's sort of overlooked in the whole criticism Facebook everybody gets on Facebook doesn't pay anything. I mean, there are some charges that there are secondary apps that you might download and that you can get chargeable but Facebook itself is free and it's providing this tremendous service we pick it sort of stoked up our expectations of what what we want of it. And so it's not because it is you said it pollutes it's not really necessarily because it makes a lot of money.

It gives us stuff and then when it does bad things where upset because how dare you sort of so much bringing our own name and dragging it through the mud. So yeah I know is this. This expectation is elevated from a sort of secondary CO2 principle, I believe it is the principal cause all of the principal role of corporations like Facebook know you are not a professor of business management to know the economics you are a professor of political science. What are the political implications of this change in the way people look at this point. Obviously, there is an expectation amongst the public that governments create policies that restrain their behavior more and extract from them directly, sort of public service.

Now a lot of economists and people like myself who sort of Dibble and dabble a little bit in and in economics sort of subscribe to the view that Adam Smith had that by sort of pursuing their own self interest. Corporations actually generate social value, but this is the expectation now and so from political science perspective am concerned that governments are going to respond to these views of the of the mass public and of course interfere in the operations of individual corporations and in the marketplace. Generally, I which would be to the detriment justifies corporations but of the actual collective good. In fact, and so there are policy implications, and you see, particularly with regards to Facebook your scene especially on the other side of the pond and the Europeans course is not it's an American company and there may be some sort of nationalistic and impulse that by the Europeans.

But they have become very aggressive towards American technology companies on particular big Internet giants including Facebook in terms of trying to regulate them and and control what they do with data. You mentioned governments increased involvement in business is there. Also the possibility of the other way around. Businesses that might've said in the past. We don't really need to worry too much about government see a need to get more involved in government to protect himself course and got in front you seen that greatly in Silicon Valley. More generally, so it was interesting in the 1990s when the Internet age really took off. There was a lot of media coverage.

A lot of academic coverage of the fact that it was surprising that big Internet and computer companies back then were talking more like Microsoft will didn't have large Washington operations. They didn't spend a lot of money on lobbyists. They didn't spend a lot of money on political action committees and campaigns.

Much of that was because they didn't think it was necessary. The government was doing its thing and they were doing their thing. But now, of course, with these increase regulations. The response is to lawyer up and lobby up and so we've got significant presence of come from companies like Facebook men's old tech giants like Microsoft in Washington was very interesting topic and subject of a column in Carolina Journal and a Carolina from our guests. Dr. Andrew Taylor Prof. applicable science at North Carolina State University.

Thank you for joining us. Thanks have a moral Carolina Journal radio if you love freedom we got great news to share with you now. You can find the latest news, views, and research from conservative groups across North Carolina all in one place North Carolina it's one stop shopping. North Carolina's freedom You'll find links to John Locke foundation blogs on the days news Carolina reporting and quick takes Carolina Journal radio interviews TV interviews featuring CJ reporters and let foundation analysts, opinion pieces and reports on higher education from the James G Martin Center for academic renewal, commentary and polling data from the scimitar's Institute and news and views from the North Carolina family policy Council.

That's right, all in one place North Carolina that's North Carolina spelled out North Carolina Try it today. North Carolina is changing not just day-to-day but outward to our minute to minute. Even 2nd to 2nd, how can you keep up with the changes, especially the ones that affect you, your family, your home, your job, make the John Locke foundation and Carolina Journal part of your social media diet on Facebook like the John Locke foundation like Carolina Journal. Follow us on Twitter at John Locke in C and at Carolina.

Journal news, insights and analysis you'll find nowhere else.

Thanks to the experts at the John Locke foundation and thanks to the first-class investigative reporting of Carolina Journal. Don't wait for the morning newspaper. Don't wait for the evening news if it's happening now it's happening here the John Locke foundation and Carolina Journal have you covered with up to the second information like us on Facebook the John Locke foundation and Carolina Journal. Follow us on Twitter at John lock in C and at Carolina. Journal did you know you can now advance freedom and free markets just by shopping with Amazon it's true online shopping is now a great way to support the John Locke foundation just shot using the Amazon smile program and designate past the work foundation to receive a portion of your purchase amount that's right you shop and Amazon donates money to assess the John Locke foundation. So here's how it works long time to Amazon smile. It's the same Amazon you know same products same prices is much better. Amazon donates .5% of the price of your eligible purchases to pass the John Locke foundation to try and be sure to designate the Locke foundation is a nonprofit, you want to support. It's that easy. So now not only will you enjoy what you buy. You'll also support freedom. Don't forget log on to today by something nice and help defend freedom, help support the John Locke foundation.

Welcome back Carolina Journal radio I Michiko got former UNC system president CD, Spangler recently died at age 86.

Among those who pay tribute North Carolina's senior US Sen. Richard Burr praised Spangler from the floor of the Senate on Capitol Hill. Although he was a brilliant businessman in my mind that Spangler will best be remembered in our state for its commitment to education and what it means for lifting individuals out of poverty, giving them a path for learning and expressing their individuality. He did this by advocating for return to the emphasis on teaching the basics, higher salaries for teachers programs for training high school principals for very challenging job that second act and the energies and personal contributions he made to her.

What made the remarkable where he was during this time as president of the University of North Carolina system position he held for over a decade is laser focused on keeping North Carolina's public university system affordable and low cost for all seeking postsecondary education because of his dedication so many years ago to low cost tuition in the UNC system commissioning pursued without a paycheck. During his time as president.

The current North Carolinians today received unaffordable great university education that Spangler once said and I quote low tuition is not a gift. It's an investment in the students and they go to work and they pay that back over a lifetime. "The number of individuals who have chosen to do just that. By Nate making North Carolina their home after graduating from one of the UNC systems. Great schools is a testament to that effort, leaving the UNC system is one of the truly great jobs. Anyone can on the Pacific of his departure. He said when talking about the UNC system and I quote from the side of angels spending time with our students to be with them is one of the great joys a person could experience. I live in a community that is vibrant, not asleep, it's wide-awake and there's always tomorrow because people are bright with viewpoints. Sometimes in conflict on quote that's US Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina discussing the legacy of the late CD Spangler Spangler was president of the UNC system from 1986 to 1997 overture with more Carolina Journal radio where doubling down on freedom at Carolina Journal radio were proud to bring you stories that impact your life and your wallet. And now get twice as much freedom when you also listen to our podcast headlock available on iTunes headlock is a little bit different.

It's a no holds barred discussion that challenges the softheaded ideas from the left and the right, like Carolina Journal radio headlock is smart and timely but with headlock you'll hear more about the culture wars get some more humor as well. We guarantee great information and a good time double down with us.

Listen to Carolina Journal radio each week and listen to Hadlock to remember, you can listen to or subscriber download each week iTunes Carolina Journal radio and headlock just what you need to stay informed and stay entertained both brought to you in the name of freedom by the John Locke foundation. Welcome back Carolina Journal radio I Michiko got our big-time sports operations, compatible with college campuses, UNC Chapel Hill history professor Jay Smith argues that the answer is no. He explained that answer during a recent presentation for the John Locke foundation's Shaftesbury society. Smith says the recent controversy over paper classes in Chapel Hill helps explain his answer presence of the time forth programs on American campuses as seen through the suitcase through the lens of the experience make it exceedingly difficult if not impossible for universities to maintain their academic standards to uphold academic integrity to follow the paths that their mission statements should be following toward truth for discovery toward research toward meaningful research that serves the public and so on. Teaching those of the things that are supposed to be about an ugly the big-time sports programs make it hard for them to fulfill the mission is laid out in their mission statements, Smith focused on recasting the debate about UNC Chapel Hill's recent scandal for a very long time UNC's leaders try to represent the paper class system W. Crowder and Julius Navarro developed as a perfect anomaly. This process is a skiing that was cooked up by 20 acting on motives that no one could understand the purpose for some of the reasons no one could really quite penetrate. They just wanted to create these incredibly easy, virtually nonexistent courses. Many maintains the general student body to benefit from, so they may have regarded that the existence of the paper class system is a problem. What I want to suggest that that wasn't the problem. That was a symptom that was a very big symptom, but it was a symptom of the problem and the problem is the existence of the time forth programs on our campuses programs that recruit to their teams, particularly in the revenue sports, football and basketball were so much of the attention is focused, competitive pressures burned so fiercely programs recruit to those teams, athletes with sometimes marginal academic skills. Sometimes no interest at all really pursuing academics in all cases the recruit athletes who put athletics first who regard themselves as athletes first who were told in their daily lives on campus, but they need to prioritize athletics over academics whose schedules make it very difficult if not impossible for them to keep up with her academic duties to follow normal academic schedule.

So is it is the existence of those programs because of the way in which they have to operate give them a competitive and commercial imperatives that they obey. It's the existence of the program since the problem because what that means for universities from North Carolina to California and everywhere in between is paths of least resistance have to be created in order to keep eligible athletes who otherwise would not remain eligible because it would get into academic difficulties would wind up on probation. Universities would find out some cases very early on that they do not have the talent to compete academically in their classrooms so coaches and athletic department staffs and their friendly enablers on the academic side of the house construct ways to keep them eligible to construct paths of least resistance. Academically, but keep them eligible that's UNC history professor Jay Smith speaking recently to the John lock foundation. He's arguing the time. Sports operations are incompatible with colleges, academic missions, Smith pointed to the documentation surrounding the Chapel Hill scandal. Read all of it what you see is that there were many soft spots around the campus. There were many friendly faculty who were cutting corners and doing favors for athletes who needed help to stay eligible. We had a philosophy professor specialist in sports ethics who offered scads of independent studies every year to virtually exclusively athletic clientele. Athletes took independent studies with voxel semester after semester, and what kinds of standards.

Was she applying studies. What we don't know for sure but we can make educated guesses because we see elsewhere in the email trove associated with awareness, investigation where she is asking to be prouder to do favors for her for her athletes. She was the advisor for the women's basketball team which is communicating with other friendly faculty to get them to offer independent studies for her athletes and others and emails in which she is really not upholding standards of integrity that one associates with any faculty member, let alone a specialist in sports ethics. That's not all. We also saw there was a math instructor who informed academic support program personnel to pass the football players who have not made the grade which is the pass them anyway.

She also found that some of these football players had clearly collaborated illicitly on exam. Should she assure the supervisors. She wasn't reported to be honest not to worry, there was a professor and geography year after year for 25 years, offered topics and geography. Independent studies effectively to athletes for athletes for their benefit and it's clear as day. If you look at the electives of these athletes who took these classes, but there week students who needed the GPA boosts given to reliably JBoss a little Debbie brother knew it other friendly faculty around the campus knew about the utility of that course, and of a professor for this purpose of constructing an eligibility machine that would work as Wednesday for me it's very clear it's in the documents it's in all of the reports. If you read between the lines, circling, wasting report that UNC Chapel Hill for a period of 2025 years network of people were complicit in eroding academic standards, undercutting them, lowering them, ignoring them for the benefit of an athletic program but needed help to me that is proof positive that big-time sports are not compatible with the academic missions. Smith says he's seen a direct impact of the conflict between academics and athletics. It threatened his course on the history of college sports course has survived at least as far as we know enough good news of course but it's survived because my department and I had to put up a 10 month fight for this course of survival and for my right to teach it. We had to overcome those athletic interests that were arrayed against us that were earning pressure to bear from many points and as far as I'm concerned my my experience with this course is more proof positive that the time athletic programs get in the way of universities academic missions to make it harder for universities to fulfill their missions. That's UNC history professor Jay Smith he's arguing that big-time sports programs are incompatible with academics on college and university campuses will return with North Carolina journal radio with among a commitment to truth and transparency in government. That is the mission of Carolina journal and we are proud to deliver and now proud to tell you the North Carolina press Association has honored to members of our team with awards reporting and writing, that's right, we really do deliver award-winning journalism we shine the light on government spending, reveal the truth about boondoggles and dig deep into programs paid for with your tax money. We keep you in the know in a way other media outlets don't in our reach and influence are growing all of our outlets.

We reach more than 1 million N. Carolinians each month so make sure you're one of them. Our monthly print edition arrives in your mailbox every month. Our online daily news site Carolina has fresh stories, opinion pieces, and more.

The award-winning Carolina journal team I reporters make government accountable to you. Call 1866 JL FINF04 your free subscription, welcome back to Carolina journal radio I'm Donna Martinez the state of Georgia is often touted as the success story for luring film and television productions out of Hollywood fact. Time magazine's recent issue does suggest that North Carolina has a film grant program is well but John Sanders, who is the director of regulatory studies for the John Locke foundation has looked closely at this question about film incentive programs and he poses something interesting. It's a question that he says some people don't want to answer, which is how we actually know that these types of incentives and grants are really positive to the economy.

John joins us now to talk about that. Welcome back to the program before we get into the state of Georgia and the fact that they say that they have netted $7 billion, I believe, and in 2016.

Let's talk about North Carolina's efforts to have film and television production. We can all agree be great if they come here to film this is a wonderful state, etc. but North Carolina actually has a grant program and in fact if you go to the website of the North Carolina film office, John big on their homepage. Is this 31 million in incentives available annually to work in North Carolina in general. The grant program is better than a tax credit program in the sense that at least legislators know how much is going to be coming out of the budget every year but essentially the film production company comes here they produce a film and they apply for the grant they gets a certain percentage of of their qualified spending lots of lots of checks boxes. Again, check off, there's lots of realizing that what what they can apply for what gets reimbursed, etc. right so John supporters of this kind of thing typically say we want to do this we want to get involved in incentives, grants, etc. because this is a big time job creator and we want these people to come in, but you have written a number of times that may not really be the case, which are your general opposition to these types of programs. General opposition is we always take these incense programs and say all look there producing jobs in the area we want to produce them off course and we're giving were giving money to do that but were not looking at the lost facts of taking resources away from other parts of the productive parts of the economy and seeing what what they would do so.

We bake into the system. All look we have done something good here and we are not seeing what bad we have done elsewhere. When economists do this. Doing econometric studies. They tend to find that these things are not a net boon to the economy that essentially that policymakers redirecting resources don't do as good a job as people who are directing their own resources to growing the economy and yet John the state of Georgia, for example, says that it made $7 billion off of these types of productions in 2016 and that date is, according to state agency in Georgia so how many calculating. I mean how do they know that this is $7 billion coming into Georgia. They don't know is essential. Answer what they are doing and this came out from first from political faction and then in the Atlanta business Chronicle that what the Georgia film office does is take the amount of spending that film companies report and they multiply it by 3.57 and say that's the economic impact so film companies reported $2.02 billion to them and 19 and 2016 and they multiplied by 3.577 we got $7.2 billion spending of economic impact from the film program. Where does the 3.57 multiplier come from wise that the magic number to multiply this by was the head of the business office of the film office in Georgia explained they don't remember they can generally only because our listeners might be thinking, come on, I can't be the case note they she actually said we don't remember we been doing it since the office was created since 1973. And the reason we still do it is we want to compare apples to apples. Well that's interesting because Ike I guess.

Intellectually I could say I understand that that the Georgia film office wants to be able to have that year to year to year comparison, but if multiplier doesn't mean anything there essentially just comparing numbers that don't mean anything absolutely right. If you were to look at my calling Roy daughters work on on multipliers or read some of my stuff, you know, there's a significant economic question on what a good multiplier actually is. But even those who buy into this would say at best a multiplier for something like this and the top would be like 1.8 so it would be in one is breaking even and then almost doubling. This is twice the maximum amount that you would expect in a multiplier. Is there any way that we can even tell if the folks in in Georgia are accounting for not just staff revenue coming into the state, but opportunity costs or anything else that would be a.m., I met Dragon other words, the cost not just the benefits note Georgia is notorious for not looking into those sorts of things on their incentives programs. A pew charitable trust called them out on a couple years ago as a researcher who has done a lot of look looking into state film incentive programs. I have not been able to find anything from Georgia that would do anything like that is one of the big numbers I would like to find because Georgia has one of the biggest programs in the country and it's also the one that North Carolina always points to us that we should be like them. I think we certainly should not be like them. If that time magazine just recently John had that big issue about this and they made a really big deal out of the state of Georgia did time bother to ask the questions that you're asking about this note? It makes for good press. Look at all of the wonderful things that are being done in George's film industry. They don't know to assess kind of questions there is support for this kind of thing in North Carolina it is you mentioned we used to have a different type of program.

We move now to a grant program which you say is a better approach if you're going to do this what you opposed but forgot to do this you prefer the grant. Yes okay so there is support on both sides of the political aisle for this thing is not just Democrats that there's Democrats and Republicans who like the idea of luring film productions.

This way, what's your sense of why that is, if the economics are pretty clear will mean senses because it's a visible and and warm feeling program you see the actual effects of films coming in movie stars eating at your favorite restaurants but you don't follow the other facts. It's a visibility problem. It's a public choice problem and down. In fact it back in 2016 and you referenced a study in the American review of Public administration by researcher took a look at a lot of this and he had a conclusion that was very much at not the narrative, so to speak callous about that was conclusion was very much in line with most economic research on the subject, but basically the incentives programs benefit the outside film production companies. That's it.

It's not helping the state is not helping anything else in this day, but the incidence programs are working to give money to an benefit once they give money to women talking with John Sanders he is the John Locke foundation's director of regulatory studies in the piece we been talking about where he analyzes the state of Georgia. You can find it John, thank you for joining is appreciated.

That's all the time we have for Carolina journal radio this week.

Thank you for listening on behalf of my cohost Mitch. Okay I'm Donna Martinez hope you'll join us again next week for more Carolina journal radio Carolina journal radio is a program of the John Locke to learn more about the John Locke foundation, including donations that support programs like Carolina journal radio send email to development John Locke called 66 GLS in 1-866-553-4636 Carolina journal radio protection of the timeline foundation airline is maintaining care system. All opinions expressed on this program nearly formation about Michelle or other programs and services in the timeline foundation is John Locke 390 may not wonder radial airline sponsored Carolina radio again

Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime