Why do taxpayers pay for bird flu?

According to a report in the Des Moines Register today, 10/26/2015, the last bird flu outbreak cost taxpayers $1 billion.  (See link below.)   The payments to chicken and egg producers included the cost of the birds that were destroyed, the cleanup, and “indemnity payments” to cover their losses.

I understand that we citizens, through our government, need to prohibit diseased meat from entering our food supply.  I don’t understand why producers are not insured against such a foreseeable risk.  If we have a law that prohibits diseased meat from being sold, and if we do not provide producers with a taxpayer paid bailout, then producers will do one (or more) of three things:  they will reduce their own risk by splitting large flocks into smaller, geographically separated flocks; they will buy insurance to cover the risk; or they will take the financial risk of loss upon themselves.

To the extent that taxpayers bail out producers, they will not take the necessary steps to manage and reduce their own risks.  We need to give notice to producers that they will not be bailed out in the future.

Link to Register article: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/money/agriculture/2015/10/25/bird-flu-when-return/74334080/

Income inequality is not the problem.

Madeline Cano conflated income inequality with poverty in her recent letter  letter to the editor in the Des Moines Register.  (Hunger is symptom of income inequality. 10/15/2015)  Poverty is the problem, not income inequality.  Rich people earning even more does not make poor people earn less.   Cano did not actually advocate taking money from the wealthy and redistributing it to the poor.  She simply repeated the erroneous meme that income inequality is the problem.

Cano correctly identified that, “…Iowans are not earning sufficient incomes to support themselves and their families.”  Increasing the incomes of Iowans in a sustainable way to reduce hunger in Iowa should be a priority.  The best way to do that is through education, work experience, and opportunity, not through an increase in the minimum wage.

Raising the minimum wage definitely hurts most those who have no job and those who have the fewest skills.  It makes it more difficult for them to get a job and, at the same time, has a tendency to make things more expensive.

To the extent that we want taxpayers to subsidize low income earners, it is better done through the current  Earned Income Tax Credit, which targets benefits to those with real need, and excludes those with higher incomes or who are claimed as a dependent by others.

Civil asset forfeiture – need to unblock opposition to reform

Thanks to the Register and Kathie Obradovich for the essay about the failure of our federal legislators to include reform of civil asset forfeiture laws in the Criminal Justice and Corrections Reform and Corrections Act of 2015.  (10/8/2015 – “Will Justice reform leave out forfeiture abuse?”)

It really is terrible that we have laws that allow law enforcement officers to confiscate property without charging any person for any crime, and that allow law enforcement agencies to keep most of what they take.  Once property is seized, the burden of proof shifts to the owner of the property to prove that the property was not used in any crime…. guilty until proven innocent.

As you reported, reforms were introduced in the Iowa Senate last spring, but missed a committee deadline.  What you did not report was that the committee that failed to move forward with those reforms is chaired by Steve Sodders from State Center, who is a Deputy Sheriff in Marshall County.  As the Register printed last spring, (4/16/15, “Panelists: Reform Iowa civil forfeiture law”) Sodders thinks the answer is to have the State of Iowa pay for an attorney to help owners try to get their property back.   He did not express any interest making reforms that would bring back the presumption of innocent until proven guilty, or that would correct the conflict of interest problem that allows law enforcement agencies to keep much of what they seize, or that would provide for public reporting of all assets seized.

Bills that would right these wrongs will likely be introduced again next year.  We all must put pressure on the Iowa Legislature to get these reforms passed.

Links to Register articles:

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/kathie-obradovich/2015/10/07/column-justice-reform-leave-out-forfeiture-abuse/73533228/

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/investigations/2015/04/14/civil-forfeiture-panel/25801567/

Highway message signs – a waste of taxpayer money and unsafe!

Why do we have Iowa Department of Transportation employees taking their expensive time trying to come up with entertaining “quips” for the 74 message signs on our interstate highways.  (See link below to Des Moines Register article, 10/6/2015 “Life-saving messages fuel roadside quips”) There has been much talk in the Iowa Legislature about whether or not we should have laws or regulations to reduce driving while distracted.  And yet, ironically, our own Iowa DOT has created a significant distraction.  I have not yet once seen a message on the signs on I-235 that would actually help reduce accidents or improve safety.  It may be nice, but it surely is not necessary to know how many minutes it takes to get to downtown or the west side.  We might save money and lives if we just take them down.

 

LInk to Register article: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/local/kyle-munson/2015/10/05/iowa-department-of-transportation-digital-message-sign-humor-zero-fatalities/73231720/