This broadcaster has 213 podcast archives available on-demand.
Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.
July 3, 2017 12:00 am
From Cherokee to Currituck 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 I'm Ashoka during the next hour, Donna Martinez and I will explore some major issues affecting our state groups that push for new occupational licenses act as bottle backers harming the economy and limiting innovation. That's the contention that a recent book on the topic. You'll hear from the author of March primary might become a permanent part of North Carolina's election calendar in the future you learn why the middle of the partisan bickering in Raleigh. State lawmakers have reached bipartisan agreement on some issues among them a series of bills designed to improve relations between local law enforcement agencies and the communities they serve. Plus a new study suggests North Carolina's economy benefits when people get sick, you hear from a critic.
Those topics are just ahead. But first, Donna Martinez joins us with the Carolina Journal headline North Carolina's new general fund budget not only lays out the spending plan for the year that starts July 1. It also contains a provision to study how North Carolina funds public education Dr. Terry stoops is the John Locke foundation's vice president for research is also the director of education studies. He's been taking a look at this provision quite closely is here to help us understand exactly what it means Terry, welcome back. Thank you for saw, why study how we fund public education while studying. It is actually a good step because in the past we have just allowed our current funding system to go on year after year. We really do need to step back and ask ourselves whether the way were funding public schools, North Carolina makes any sense because a study done by the legislative staff told us that you know there are some issues with the way that we fund our public schools is not very transparent it's it's hard to follow. Their only a handful of people in the state that actually can understand how we fund our public schools so that maybe we should take a look at it is extremely complex system. We have a North Carolina of doling out billions and billions of state dollars. Have we been doing it the same way for a long time we have and we unfortunately been content with the way that we've been funding our public schools and we do so by basically having dozens of little pots of money earmarked for different things. So there is a is an allotment for boxers allotment for teachers is allotment for any number of different things we spend money on in our public schools and the monies really hard to follow.
Were talking mainly about state dollars because the federal dollars that we get are pretty closely defined in how we are supposed to spend those dollars and local funds are extremely flexible so localities can earmark the money for any number of different things about the way we spend state dollars and we have this complicated system for decades and now the legislature is finally getting around to see if there's a better way of doing you just said something that some folks might be scratching their heads and saying I didn't even realize that a lot of people think that it's the state of North Carolina that funds public education.
Some people may think, well, you know, I hear that's why I'm paying more property taxes to my my city and/or my county because they say we have to pay for education is really three levels of government involved in funding education.
That's right in the state government is the largest in fact of all the 50 states were in that that top percentile or is not the top percentile, but the top group of states with regard to the amount of state funding.
We give to our public school so round 65% of our state funding comes from the state, with another 25% from localities and another 10% from the federal government.
So if you look at the percentage that the state contributes our public schools. We have one the highest in the nation. So that is the one thing to remember a lot of other states from their public schools with local property taxes. We fund our most from the state and because the state provides so much of the funding they really get to set the rules and in this case they set the rules on how the money gets divided up between districts because that's really what were talking about.
So the state legislature says we are going to set aside X amount of money, say $8 billion for public schools. We wanted in general to go to these things.
But it's the Department of Public instruction that really determines how that money and how much of that money goes to each of our school districts and how it's distributed to those districts and right now we have a very districts centered way of funding our public schools. We would like to see it and we've been at the John Locke foundation's been advocating this for several years. We want to see more student based funding system so I know we are very districts based everything is based on the school district in the schools in that district. Terry, the legislature has now set up this study group is going to take a look at all this. It sounds really complex, even just from the different things that you're describing so where did they start when they all sit down. That first meeting. What are they going to say here's what were going to do well. I hope they start by looking at the current system they need to acquaint themselves with how the current system works because that will tell them all they need to know about the necessity to change it because there are some folks that don't believe that we need to change the way we fund our public schools. They like it just fine and some frankly don't care about the issue that suffered transparent that it's not easy to find where dollar a starts and ends so that's a concern. So, they first have to make sure that they understand the current system and then they have to see what alternatives are out there and you look at a lot of the alternative systems they some of them have a variation of the way that we fund schools now and some are radical departure to the way we fund our public schools now and I think that's the direction we need to go tell us little bit more about that you're saying it would be a radical departure. What would be different under the plan that Dr. Terry stoops would put forth what incentive thinking about funding teachers and funding school district personnel and funding books of the funding would be attached to the students something called a weighted student funding system with basically what we do as we say okay every student in the states we will attach $5000 to that student. And if that student has a special need we will attach an additional amount of money if they come from a low income school will attach an additional amount of money so that if you have a student from a low income family that is has a special need that student would have say $9000 attached to them rather than the base of $5000 so it would really be attentive to individual student needs and not just pots of money that are given to a school district now. My hope is that by attaching it to the students thinking about funding in a student way. We start to think to ourselves well for attaching funding to the student. Maybe the student or parent should have a say in where that money goes and what you just said there that's usually where the rub comes into the story when we talk about them making any sort of change to how things work is going to be one of the issues that this study group looks at potentially really changing having that the money follow the student versus just going directly into a system that's right.
And that's really down the road we were knocking to get to that system anytime soon it's going to be implemented and considered over many years because one thing we have to remember is if we change the way we fund our public schools. There may be winners and losers. Some districts receive an extraordinary amount of money right now and maybe under revised system they wouldn't so legislators have to be very careful here to ensure that there aren't huge winners and huge losers, but instead we start and perhaps slowly moved to a system where we change the way we fund schools but not to the detriment of certain districts and not to the benefit of others.
Any sense of how long it will take this study group to take a look at all of these issues and presumably there can have to put together some sort of report and recommendations to submit to the legislature.
I think they can look at the distant different systems very quickly and easily over the course of a few months there only a limited number of options out there. The real question becomes implementation. Once they choose or select one type of funding system to go to. It may take several years for that to come in the full effect, and no doubt lots of folks who want to weigh in on what those recommendations turn out to be will have you back to talk about that.
We been talking with Dr. Terry stoops. He is the vice president for research. The director of education studies, the John Locke foundation.
Thank you. Say with this much more Carolina journal radio to come in just 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 journal.com tackles those questions every day. The John Locke foundation publishes Carolina journal in print each month and on the web each email@example.com 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 firstname.lastname@example.org and the voices of the newsmakers themselves at Carolina journal radio in print on the air and on the web. You can find the information you email@example.com welcome back to Carolina journal radio like Michiko guy when business owners call for government to increase regulation of their own industry just looking out for the customers right, not necessarily new book labels. These business owners bottle liquors in here to explain why is the books co-author Dick Carpenter's director of strategic research at the Institute for Justice at a professor at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs. Thanks for joining us pleasure. Thank you were going to get into this topic of bottle liquors and what they do. But the first of all, let's just define what is a bottleneck or just so we define it to somebody who advocates for the creation or perpetuation of an economic regulation, particularly in occupational license in order to restrict free flow of workers into occupation and enjoying economic benefit as a result. So basically this would be a business that says government come in and regulate his future. Yes I know, at first blush it sounds crazy. Who would ask for government regulation, government intrusion, the business, but people come to realize that if they can actually keep competitors out through recall bottleneck then variable to inflate artificially inflated prices and wages as a result know you mentioned those results that you conflate that the wages inflate the prices but a lot of people hearing this off the top of their head would say all this is good. These businesses realize that they need to have government step in and help in and make sure that customers are going to be protected. Do you have a hard time convincing some people that this is not good.
These people are doing this just to benefit the customers. It's to benefit themselves and just so on the surface, it does seem like that's what's going on. In fact, when people ask for a license in their industries.
That's how the licenses come into existence people in the industry. Ask for a license.
The impression is that were going to protect the public, because were going to ensure the people have a certain level of knowledge and experience. But in fact, the researchers looked at the shows that there is no benefit in the terms of greater quality of service or greater protection for the public that the real result is this increased to consumers increase in terms of prices, the consumer was.
Consumers will buy but also fewer job opportunities because this is one of the rare public policies that does what is designed to do. It actually keeps people out. That was time to do so keeps people out of the industries or reduces employment opportunities as well.
So the policy with the Holocaust and not much benefit. The term bottle liquors.
I have not heard before. In regards to this, but I have heard this situation described in the past is operating almost like a medieval guild some respects, is it similar to what we saw centuries ago, when guilds decided yes you could work with us or know you can't that's exactly right precisely. It operates very much like a deal to recall that years ago in a guild system. People who were in the particular industry that one protection they would band together. They would then go to their whatever city government was and they would ask for certain type of protection so they could keep people out and regulate who could come in and so the government whatever the form of government that had city government would grant them that exclusive right to practice and so an occupational license works very much the same way where the government gives the industry a certain type of protection and those who were in the industry have the ability to regulate who comes in as a result of this government power that they're not given.
That is the voice of Dick Carpenter. He is director of strategic research at the Institute for Justice, also a professor at the aversive Colorado at Colorado Springs and he's co-author of this book titled bottle liquors gaming the government for power and private profit within the book itself. I guessing that you're documenting a number of cases in which this plays out.
What are some of the most egregious example right so each chapter looks at a different occupation. So we start with the alcohol industry in the three-tier system and then we do cosmetologists and we talk a little bit about barbers but mostly focus on cosmetologist now cosmetologist use their laws to exclude Arab raters to prevent hair breeders from from practicing their particular craft. We talk about interior designers believe it or not, to work as an interior designer in three states and the District of Columbia, you after you actually have to have a license and to earn that license to become an interior designer, you have to have six years of education or experience a happier six years. Yes, six years is one of the most severe licenses out there six years of education, experience of present national examination that is offered only by interior design Association course so that's one of the occupations that we take on in the book.
We also talk about street vendors.
So this is become a very popular occupation in the popular way for people to buy food. For instance, but not exclusively food street vending is as old as America goes back centuries and now in many cities, and a growing number of cities, one has to be licensed in order to work as a street vendor.
So we talked street vendors. We also talk about one of the public.
One more pernicious out there and that is the regulation of the transportation industry particular taxis and limousines, which is of course seen a lot of people now with burden lifted ridesharing by the regulation of transportation goes back many many years.
We talk about the transportation industry and now we don't. We have seen how bottle liquors have attempted to regulate the mere act of speaking. Talk about a case that involves gentlemen here in North Carolina who had a blog he order to share his experience about being on the Kaleo diet and how to improve his life, his health so he wrote a blog to talk about that and the North Carolina Board of dietitians actually said you have to censor your blog or or else they would bring the hammer down. He was just talking.
He was even making a living from his blog, but it didn't matter. They wanted to make sure that no one could give advice even though there are millions of guidebooks. People all over the place half of newspaper columns and there on the radio talking about diet and health. But they wanted to make sure that there was no threat to anyone in their industry. As a result of somebody giving out free advice and that was a Steve Cooksey and so we took that particular case as well. A lot of people will hear this, I think, and say to themselves yeah I can understand that in these egregious cases, there should be licensing but in other cases, what's the alternative, because if you got rid of the licenses would all these bad actors be able to go out there and scam people so are there good alternatives to this licensing regime. Yes, there are many good alternatives to not least of which are actually market alternatives, so when people think there's no government regulation.
They seem to think there's no regulation at all, but in fact there is a form of regulations, market regulation, the behavior of individuals in an industry is in fact regulated. It's regulated by the pressure brought to bear. As a result of consumer decisions. So if I'm not fun not to maintain a certain level of quality of service in my business. Consumers are going to stay away and as a result, my bottom line suffers and so my behavior, my services are regulated. If you will buy these market forces. These market pressures but now on our phones. We have the ability to even more so today than at any time in history we have the ability to regulate the behavior of individuals by the reputation that one has and so consumer can actually go online and fill out ratings or or put their experience in writing and make it available for everyone else to see. And that also applies pressure on provide goods and services as well. So there are market forces out there. The regulate the way people provide goods and services within their government forms of regulation that are not licensing but have some of the same benefits. The book, bottle liquors, gaming the government for power and private profit, the co-author is Dick Carpenter, director of strategic research at the Institute for Justice also professor the aversive Colorado at Colorado Springs. Thanks doing is my pleasure.
Thanks for Carolina journal radio. Are you looking to make North Carolina more free the John Mott foundation is in here are three things you can do today to help us make it happen. First, know the facts visit John Mott data work for data analysis, interviews, and more and read Carolina journal.com to learn what government is doing with your money. Second, influence the debate invest in the John Locke foundation's work with a tax-deductible donation you can get it done in firstname.lastname@example.org and third make North Carolina more free by sharing the message of freedom. It's easy when you visit John Mott.org. Click on shareable's download past messages to freedom. Dear friends, print the messages and mail them, or if your savvy computer user share the message of freedom on Facebook and Twitter know the facts influence the debate and share the message three things you can do today to help us make North Carolina more free. Get started email@example.com North Carolina is changing not just day-to-day but outward to our minute to minute and 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 lock 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 lock in the sea 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 Locke in the sea 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 Mott foundation just shot using the Amazon smile program and designate 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 smile.amazon.com 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 will also support freedom.
Don't forget log on to smile.amazon.com today by something nice and help defend freedom. Support the John Locke foundation will connect Carolina journal radio and the Chico guy North Carolina moved its primary election forward from May to March 20 16 presidential race. Now a March primary could become a permanent part of the state election calendar Republican state representative Bert Jones recently countered to build to move primary elections. Currently they are in May except if you read the strike phrase there that when South Carolina holds its presidential primaries after 15 March, the North Carolina primary Moose and so what this bill would do would be to establish a certain date in March for the North Carolina primaries for everyone there would be one primary for the presidential primary and everyone else as well so it would be the Tuesday after the first Monday in March House Democratic leader Darren Jackson objected to the change. He reminded colleagues that surrounding states have linger primaries for legislative elections. We all know that moving the primary from May tomorrow is going to make for much longer general election campaign will be good for people in the industry the media the consultants not so great for the candidates and it actually means that we are having session in May you and I will be really heated up the next thing that's going to be an issue. Moving the filing deadline to December is really an income protection idea and also predicts me just like you protect everyone else in this house as incumbents is not a partisan issue, but it doesn't conflict with Christmas and Hanukkah and really the one time a year since nonpartisan in this country is December is kind of the time you get away from partisan politics. Most for Jones reminded colleagues about the original reason for a March primary to play a more important role in the presidential race.
I think if you look historically, the states that have grown earlier have been more influential. You can always look back and you can find one or two exceptions to the rule, but as the ninth largest state in the country and the fact that our neighbor South Carolina for instance is going very early. I think it does make sense to have our presidential primary a bit earlier filing date in this case would be sometime between Thanksgiving which is in November and Christmas, which is at the end of December and personally I just don't think that regardless when the filing date is that it necessarily favors one person over another. One party have another Viacom but the challenger. I don't really see that. I think it is good for citizens that we establish a date certain. You been listening to debate about the Gen. assembly's plan to move North Carolina primary elections permanently to March will return with more Carolina journal radio in a moment. Are you tired of fake news. Well you won't find it here at Carolina journal.
We don't make things happen and we don't presume or assign motives. There's no simpler way to put it then that were proud to say that honest, factual, rigorous journalism is the Carolina journal way our reporting team is focused on accountability in government and policymaking. No matter which political party is in power, and regardless of the person taken to task in the story at Carolina journal where the holding to the truth and to transparency.
Unlike fake news lies, innuendo, questionable sourcing all meant to create controversy not inform the debate.
So the next time you're confronted with fake news log onto Carolina journal.com or pick up the latest print edition you'll find compelling news reporting from a team that knows what it means to be real journalists committed to truth Carolina journal. You can count on us for the facts will connect Carolina journal radio on the Chico guy amid all the partisan fights in the North Carolina Gen. assembly.
Some issues attract a good deal of bipartisan support.
One of them. Improving relationships between local law enforcement agencies and the communities they serve Democratic state representative Ed Haynes recently discussed legislative efforts to improve those relationships. We begin that process during the last biennium with a $5 million, but the provision body cameras as well as taking the first step toward establishing statewide guidelines regarding video taken from the body cameras. We continued this commitment with the league of municipalities. Last year we held a meeting of law-enforcement officers and leaders in Raleigh to discuss what could be done to enhance opportunities for better engagement with police officers in the community across the state. Last October Craig Horne I have a serious conversation about what we could to collect up to move this process forward. We decide to engage in a number of Republican and Democratic leaders in the House and Senate to discuss ideas regarding legislation that can make a difference for law enforcement and the community so positive we got back in the session and people got busy on the individual process and products in and projects but funny thing happened.
Many of the people who we initially engage with my October ransom great legislation aimed at improving protections for law enforcement and making our citizens safer and their engagement will law enforcement safer and even providing fair outcomes. When law enforcement and the judiciary as happens in every profession water happens to get it wrong. Haynes ticked off a list of bills in 2017 that tackled similar themes. House Bill 21 one by Kim Goodman body of McKissick Daniel and Britt. This was an act to require driver instruction along procedures during traffic stops. We also had another somewhat related bill calculated for lumbar representative of all that Bill dealt with deaf and hard of hearing designations the life.
These are to build really games and culture changes with regard police community relations. They will Carolina Haynes mentioned other bills tackling similar topics also have House Bill 571, which was myself and Dr. MacArthur quick automatic function of a person's record. If a person won't be convicted and incarcerated and then exonerated. Of course this speaks to things that we understand our justice system is not perfect numbers off of when we make these mistakes and that these people have been exonerated by the state.
Their arrest records ought to be cleared as well. Also, House Bill 591 will run by a resident of Charles Brown was directing the apartment just in public safety to study training that may be provided to law-enforcement officers to improve the officer's ability during a traffic stop to identify whether a person is deaf or hard of hearing or development disability, traumatic brain that Democratic state representative Ed Haynes highlighting recent efforts to help improve relationships between law enforcement agencies and the communities they serve. Joining Haynes for recent news conference where other legislators who worked on these issues. Democratic Sen. Floyd McKissick help sponsor the bill that would help new drivers learn the best way to handle a traffic stop. We know, and we understand that when young drivers are learning to drive. They also need to learn and understand what's appropriate protocol and appropriate procedures when they're detained or stop by a law enforcement officer. Unfortunately, a young driver may engage in what they considered to be innocent conduct in reaching underneath her seat or reaching for the glove compartment of getting out of their vehicles at the same time that law enforcement officer is perceiving that same activity as a potential threat. We need to make certain that our drivers know and understand the protocol is what process they should follow, laughing their hands on that steering wheel on that dashboard not engaging in activity that the could be considered threatening to escalate to an encounter something that could avoid the tragic outcome. That's were concerned about doing it proactively before these incidences occur. Republican representative John Faircloth is a former city police chief. He's been working on these issues as well. I have seen over the past three or four years here more and more cooperation between the Senate and the house between individual members in the Senate and the house and the citizens who are interested in the headlines there. See speak to problems analysis about relation ship between citizens and police officers last session with after about two years were we put together the bill having to do with police cameras that still a product is being worked on. In addition to something that Bill working on this time and there will be some minor additions that that's a work in progress because every time a citizen meets a police officer one or the other or both could be a moment of stress and that's where we see problems that services McKissick was talking about that we need to try to address in terms of knowledge for young people. What you do when officer stopped to and in terms of how do you de-escalate the situation.
When you see that the other party is having a problem having some problem having his spirit, if you will. So, I am so proud to be part of this bill. This time, which speaks to having education to young drivers to heaven know what they should be doing with that blue light goes on behind Democratic representative Cynthia Ball has helped lead the effort to add information about death and hearing impaired drivers on drivers licenses. One of the things that prompted this bill was the tragedy in Charlotte when a young person was shot by an officer not understanding that he was hearing impaired. This bill puts on the actual record of the person's driver's license electronically, as well as printed on the actual drivers license, a symbol that designates that the person is hearing impaired and it also is in the electronic record of the attack of the car that that person is driving.
We believe that that allows the law enforcement officer to have some advance notice of the individual who he is approaching and be prepared to recognize that person as hearing-impaired or deaf, and we believe that that protects our law enforcement as well as how vulnerable citizens are hearing-impaired representative Amos quick added his voice to the conversation.
I think all of us on both sides of the four interested in perfecting our experiences when we have law enforcement or systems like criminal justice system that they are achieving their purpose, but also are fair to the people who encounter law enforcement will encounter our criminal justice system so it was a delight for me to be able to be a part of some of these bills of the body cam bills, albeit expungement bills that seek to do what we all want to do in this country that is perfect our union so that we have the best system in the world like we currently have will have opportunities to improve the system will see opportunities to do so.
Sen. Paul Lowe explained why he supporting these measures we got to make things better and to make things better and to build upon what is happening, we have to look at ways of having good relationship with good relationships make for better communities make for safer communities you been listening to highlights from a recent news conference touting a series of bipartisan bills each fits with the general theme of improving relationships between North Carolina law enforcement agencies and the communities they serve will return with more 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 all across the state.
All in one place North Carolina conservative.com one-stop shopping for North Carolina St. movement North Carolina conservative.com. You'll find links to John Locke foundation blogs on the days news Carolina journal.com reporting and quick takes Carolina journal radio interviews TV interviews featuring CJ reporters and Locke foundation analyst plus opinion pieces and reports on higher education. All of that from the Pope Center for higher education policy commentary and polling data from the Thomas Institute and news and views from the North Carolina family policy Council. That's right, all of that, all in one place North Carolina conservative.com that's North Carolina spelled out conservative.com North Carolina conservative.com. Log on today.
Welcome back to Carolina journal radio I'm down in Martinez slot economics that is the conclusion of the John lock foundation's senior economist Dr. Roy Coronado after he analyzed a report that concludes North Carolina's hospitals and healthcare systems boost the states economy Dr. Coronado joins us now to explain why getting sick really isn't that big goose that some people say it is Roy welcome back to the program. Good to be back down and tell us why you decided to write about this issue. Healthcare economics essentially well when you look at this study I was glancing at it and I realize the what they were telling us beyond initially what they're saying which is well you know hospital spend this money and invest in equipment and and doctors and nurses and so on. Therefore, that money ripple through the economy increases GDP.
What is unstated is what initially generates as spending is people getting sick, which I usually don't want to try the idea. If you think about this study carefully. They say this, spending on the part hospitals boost the economy. But what boost that spending on the part of the economy will people getting sick and needing medical treatment and the implication of the study is the more people are sick more costs are associated with them hospital costs.
In particular, and therefore, the better it is for the economy. That's that's crazy. And the problem is that they don't they don't consider the fact that people would be spending this money otherwise. If they were getting sick, and the real benefit of this government spending. Sorry of this hospital spending isn't that the hiring more doctors and nurses that the cost of benefit is in mail talk about this at all. Okay well God benefits life saved medical conditions avoided, and so on, but they don't even discuss any of those which are the true benefits of that spending Roy. How would an industry come up with a conclusion like this that you really got to deep into the analysis of how they went about determining what is a cost and what is a benefit yes it's about. It's very slippery.
This study is very slippery because they start out by saying over going to look at all these hospital expenditures on capital equipment on doctors and nurses and so on. And they never identify the most cost, but the fact is that all these things are are healthcare costs and if you look in the literature. No one views increased healthcare costs is a good thing. They will see it as a burden on economic growth and it's a thing to be minimized and something that we devote a lot of policy. They both state and federal to try to minimize those costs right but they never call them because, first they call them expenditures and then in the study.
They say this is actually a benefits analysis so they suddenly start calling them benefits, avoiding the whole notion that really what they're talking about and it healthcare costs essentially being good for the economy which flies in the face of all economic analysis of of healthcare costs. Why would someone produce a report like that. Well it's it's specially for summing this was put out by the North Carolina Hospital Association.
They are trade association that wants everyone to think that that you know what they do is has this great benefit for the economy and's and its study is done by research triangle listed to which is paid for by North Carolina Hospital Association so they basically being paid to give a result of the Hospital Association wants to see and they use and an economic impact model called in plan, which is really designed to show how great an impact a particular industry is having. There is no such thing within the context that model of of actually any industry having a negative impact.
I've written about that elsewhere. Interesting that you point out economics aside, I don't think there's anyone listening to our voices that would disagree that the positive impact of hospitals and doctors and nurses and radiologists in cancer specialists is that they're saving lives there serving saving lives in and of course if there are benefits, but the fact is that everything they identify is the cost of generating that benefit. They are not the benefits really. These healthcare costs are not getting to GDP their absorbing GDP then not getting to the job they are absent actually absorbing part of the labor force to what to do these things if those if the if that part of the GDP was liberated to do other things by either reducing healthcare cost making more efficient or or having no you were sick people, we'd all be better off, but I'm either crazy if you think about the implications this is really crazy you know if smoking causes more cancer.
That means more people going hospital hospitals with them or not think we CDP. I mean that's actually the if you think about the absurdity of this study, that's where it takes you now. I have known you for a number of years. I know that this happens to be what I would call one of your pet peeves is no absolutely epic impact study so this is not the first time that you take a look at a study like this and often Roy I we see this sometimes at the local government level right where you will have a proposal on the table to say a county commissioners group that they want time to use taxpayer money to build a hotel and convention center you get the same kind of thing right to act like there's no cost that the what these things do are examine expenditures and always assuming that if that money didn't go to whatever it is the stadium where the convention center wasn't going somewhere else so they don't take into consideration the fact possibility that any of that money or the jobs or whatever would go elsewhere if it wasn't being channeled by the government expenditure into building. Whatever it is. The project is Roy Sam is scribing is pretty fundamental economics, basic why then is it that these types of economic impact studies, not just in North Carolina but everywhere they exist everywhere and when you hear a proposal to build something or do something. What is it that deaf folks like you can be doing is just talking more about this to try to get people to understand what I think we do have to get legislators to understand to look at these things very critically because look the real reason these think of a trade association or something puts a lot of money into these things is that they expect to affect legislation one way or another and you right now. For example, there still certificate in the loss will Hospital Association. That's are very much against those in and they want to look we are doing all these way think you should do anything that hurts hospital lookout. How good this is becoming so we want to do is try to make legislators especially understand that they need to look at these studies with a very very critical. I understand what they are saying or what they are not saying what about for those of us who are taxpayers. If you're living in a city or county and and you hear that there's a proposal to spend more tax dollars on building something. What could just an average taxpayer do what should they know in order to perhaps go to that city Council meeting and start asking questions. Well, absolutely. I think with this you do go to city Council meeting.
Armed with our research dialogue about our I was seriously happy. We done a lot on this site in the last two months I've written some written several papers on this issue and say hey look. This was done and and here are the problems because look all have the same problems, no matter what oh what the source. What the issue is the models that they use have all the same problems or commercial models are met to generate big numbers and in the key is to make sure that costs as well as benefits are identified. That's right. And costs are almost never identified.
In fact what they do is that they may identify cost but then they call them benefits.
Coronado has been writing about this and of course you can find his analysis of this particular economic impact study John Locke.org, along with all of his other writing. Thank you done that all the time we have for the program this week you for listening on behalf of my cohost Mitch. Okay I'm Donna Martinez next week for another edition of Carolina Journal radio Carolina Journal radio is a program the John Locke foundation to learn more about the John Locke donations support programs like Carolina Journal radio send email to development John Locke done work, call 1866166554636 Journal radio nation airline is all opinions expressed on this program nearly mentioned on the show or other foundation is the main airline sponsored Carolina radio again