Guarino

Rating America's Public Debt

Some readers are doubtless familiar with the organizations that rate the quality or safety of insurance companies and/or bonds.  A few of the most commonly known organizations are Standard and Poor's, A.M. Best and Moody's.

Years ago, when shopping for life insurance, I became aware of yet another organization-- Weiss.  The scuttlebutt was that the other rating organizations were not sufficiently sensitive from the standpoint of detecting financial weakness or a deterioration in safety among those rated.  But Weiss, it was argued, was more sensitive from  this perspective.

Last month, Standard and Poor's lowered its rating of our nation's long-term credit outlook from "stable" to "negative". 

And it turns out that Weiss has gotten in the business of rating the credit of sovereign nations.  It rated the United States a "C", just two levels above junk status.  This ranks us 33rd among 47 nations rated. 

Liberal Democrats at all levels-- national, state and local-- continue to operate under the illusion that money can be spent freely, that economies are not necessary.  They engage in demagoguery and scare tactics to oppose even the most modest attempts at spending reform.  At the federal level, it is over Medicare.  At the state level, it is over public education.  And locally, it has been over items like trash disposal and health department spending and education bond debt.  

Job creation and homebuying continue to be weak.  Gas prices remain high.  Industrial output is variable.  And the inexorable trend toward increasing state control of the economy continues.  We have not even remotely recovered from the deep recession.

And now, the telltale signs are developing that presage the nation's impending debt crisis.  Watch the political behavior of the Democrats in response.

Update: Now, Moody's weighs in.

Why Is Greensboro Losing Cops?

Triad Watch has a post that questions the premise in a N&R article Sunday that inadequate pay and/or benefits might be driving away Greensboro police officers (unposted).

Abner and his commenter raise some good questions. 

Is the minor exodus from the GPD a reaction to the new chief enforcing higher standards and requirements among the ranks, and fighting crime appropriately?   For years, the GPD had a psychology of entitlement that had infected the ranks.  Is the new chief, in fact, doing these things?

Or is the exodus attributable to the possibility that he is not doing enough in this regard?  In recent months, we saw James Hinson promoted to captain.   Has the previous regime of racial preferences been dismantled?  If not, it might be driving away good officers.

In order to determine why these officers left, a fairly comprehensive, structured questionnaire or interview would have to be performed in each case.  Every officer has his or her own story; and his or her own reason for leaving.  Sometimes an employee resignation can be a sign of a poor relationship with his or her supervisor.  Sometimes it can somehow be a reflection of performance issues.   

Abner is right that we cannot presume pay and benefits are the big issue.  It might be a contributor, but we need more data. 

Downtown Crowd Mobilizing Against Modest Budget Cut

Three board members for Downtown Greensboro, Inc. (DGI) had an op-ed piece in the News and Record Saturday arguing against the modest cut the city of Greensboro proposes for its funding (unposted).  They argue, without proving their point, that this budgetary reduction will limit the growth of downtown.  The presumption is that the level of funding for this particular agency correlates directly with the growth of downtown; but no proof is offered to support that claim.

In addition, the piece identifies downtown as "the city's largest and most important district".  Now, wait a minute!  I thought we were supposed to believe that designation belongs to the Coliseum.  Every time Matt Brown has a new proposal for the Coliseum-- the amphitheater, the aquatic center, etc.-- we are supposed to bow in reverence because of its putative economic importance.

But this week, at least, downtown has preeminence over the Coliseum as DGI vies to maintain funding at current levels.  Everyone, once again, must bow.

The premise that taxpayers should be supporting the interests of downtown property owners, or that the aesthetic preferences of downtown advocates must be appeased, should not take precedence over worthy municipal activities.  And I will be very glad if we do not have a tax increase this year.

Memorial Weekend

Jail Overcrowding in Guilford County

As I noted earlier this week, Commissioners Skip Alston and Bruce Davis have made some noises about the costs associated with the new county jail.

But our memories tend to decay quickly.

Here are the minutes from a November 17, 2005 commissioners' meeting.  You will see on page 18 a reference to a letter that had been sent by the state jail inspector on the matter of overcrowding in the Guilford County Jail.  We had apparently been operating in violation of state requirements.  The state engages in some regulatory activity with respect to the manner in which county jails are operated; and the focus of the state's interest appears to be safety.

The deficiencies we have had with our county jail are to be contrasted with the fact that, in the case of our schools system and our public health department, we operate well in excess of state requirements.

This bears repeating.  We far exceed state requirements for the schools and the health department.  But we have failed to meet state requirements with respect to our jail.

Let's keep this in mind as Alston and Davis demagogue the issue further.

County Commissioners Appear Poised to Leave Gerrymandered Districts Intact

Jordan Green has a good article that explores the thinking of the county commissioners regarding the task of redistricting.  Let us recall that the current district seats are heavily gerrymandered to favor local Democrats.

What is the bottom line?

Kirk Perkins and Skip Alston want to minimize the amount of reassignment.  That would, of course, tend to preserve the gerrymandered districts.  Democrats would continue to get the advantage systematically and by design.  At this point, we do not know how many Democratic fellow commissioners will be allied with them on this point.

But this means you already have at least two out of eleven commissioners who are philosophically against fixing the problem.  They are both Democrats.

If we are going to reverse the Democratic gerrymandering, the districts need to be changed significantly.  Alston and Perkins are standing against that possibility in order to help themselves, and to help their party retain control.

Let's recall the big fuss that was made by local Democratic activists and their accomplices in the media one month ago when it was suspected that Republicans on the Greensboro City Council were engaged in gerrymandering. 

We need to see the media make a big fuss over the prospect of Democrats on the Board of County Commissioners maneuvering to preserve their gerrymandering.  Preserving a gerrymandered condition is ethically just as noxious as creating one.

The media needs to shine a huge, blinding, persistent, scorning spotlight on these self-interested Democrats just as they did in the case of City Council Republicans.  Is it going to happen?

How Many Detention Officers Do We Need in the New County Jail?

County Commissioners Skip Alston and Bruce Davis have expressed concern during recent days about the budget for the county sheriff's department and the staffing requirements for the new jail.

It is not uncommon for some degree of antipathy to be held by African-American politicians toward law enforcement; and this must be viewed in the context of longstanding difficult relations between that community and police, and the large numbers of young black males that in recent times have had unwanted encounters with the criminal justice system.

In any case, we learn in the News and Record this morning Skip's attitude toward funding the operation of the new jail.  He says there should be no sacred cows.  I agree.  But he further states he has seen "no compelling evidence" the jail needs more personnel.  He says we should instead be funding jail alternatives and public health so less people will need to go to jail.  He further suggests that options include not increasing the staffing level at the jail; or not opening the jail at all.

Let's think about this.  Has he pushed a complete suspension of the school bond construction projects as of yet?

It is important to understand that, in the state of North Carolina, local government operates according to the ground rules established by the state.  Certain functions of local government must meet minimal state requirements.

Our public health department in Guilford County operates way in excess of what the state of North Carolina truly requires.  I believe the same is also true of the Guilford County Schools system.  But the opposite seems to be true of our county jail. 

We have been at risk of getting in trouble with the state because of the substandard state of our county jail; and that is one of the factors that motivated the jail bond issue.

These realities are a reflection of the political priorities we have had locally.  But law enforcement and criminal justice should be the highest priority of local government, above all others.

How do we need to staff the county jail?  I don't claim to know; but I have a suggestion.  Perhaps we should take a look at what the state requires and expects of our county jail, and then make sure we have met those minimal requirements before funding extras in other county departments.

Calling In the Troops on the Landfill

Someone passed along a message that has apparently been sent by one east Greensboro functionary seeking to drum up opposition to the landfill from districts 3, 4 and 5.  And the effort will probably succeed at least to some extent.  This is, after all, the Politically Virtuous City.

Here is the message:

Numerous neighborhood organizations in Greensboro have formed the Citizens for Economic and Environmental Justice (CEEJ) and they are concerned about the perception of the City Council members that the opposition to the reopening of the White Street Landfill is only from the residents of District 2. These neighborhoods are certain there are citizens in other neighborhoods of the city who are also opposed to the reopening of the landfill.

 

CEEJ would like to present petitions that are signed by citizens who live in Districts 3,4, and 5. These neighborhoods need support from all Greensboro neighbors and friends with petitions signed before the council meeting on June 7, 2011. The blank petitions can be downloaded at www.theceej.org and the signed and notarized petitions should be given to...

 

        After months of pleas by those in all areas of our city, the majority groups on the council urging this transgression have made no attempt to truly listen to the extent of this wrong. They have come across with indifference and a rigid demeanor suggesting no sensitivity or concern for those living in District 2.

 

·        As offensive as that is, it is even more disheartening that 20% of our citizens in this neighborhood are to be denied a clean and environmentally safe place to live.

 

·        The council majority caught up in the execution of this travesty, are selling the right of a prideful neighborhood for a - yet to be truly explained – savings so vaguely contended that the reported ranges is from 2 to 8 million dollars per year.  The average of that would be 1/10 of 1% of our annual city budget. 

 

·        In order to gain the savings contended; the council is bringing on the burden to us all of….

 

o       Racial division in Greensboro

 

o       The pain to our city that such a move brings.

 

o       A violation of NC law and the expense of the challenge that is bringing – in addition to the adverse and divisive publicity that it will generate.

 

o       Contractually obligating the city to agreement with a private company for multimillion dollar payments for  a fifteen year period.

 

Carolinians Favor Abortion Informed Consent Bill

Civitas reports that Carolinians support legislation to require informed consent for abortion by an overwhelming margin of 56%-36%.

Pro-abortion forces have been doing whatever they can to oppose the legislation.  But it needs to be passed.  I would have no problem dispensing with the ultrasound requirement if it would likely lead to Governor Perdue signing the bill; or if it is necessary to override her veto.

Arrested NAACP Head Transported by Ambulance to Jail Instead of Police Car

Rev. William Barber was arrested for disorderly conduct at the state legislature today.  He had to be transported to jail, but General Assembly police said they could not use a regular patrol car because of his size.  He was apparently too big for the patrol car.  They therefore had to have him transported by ambulance.

Who pays for the ambulance call?

What is a Federally Qualified Health Center?

Recently, there has been much feigned outrage over the comments I made at the C4GC meeting last week that were deemed to be politically incorrect.  Among other things, I suggested that the Guilford County Department of Public Health should scale back significantly on the clinical role it is playing.

But it turns out that is one of the main proposals in County Manager Brenda Jones-Fox's proposed budget.  Jones-Fox essentially defunded both Guilford Adult Health and Guilford Child Health.  And I doubt she would have made this proposal if Skip Alston did not approve. 

"The horrors!", you might say.  But it is all part of a plan.  These two entities are scheduled to merge with HealthServe and the High Point Regional Adult Health Center.  Collectively, the merged entity is to be called Triad Adult and Pediatric Medicine, Inc.

This organization will be "private", but is seeking designation as a Federally Qualified Health Center.  What does this mean?

These health centers are funded by the federal government to provide primary care services in communities throughout the country. They are creatures created and controlled by the federal government. They get lots of federal funding.  President Obama's stimulus package passed during early 2009 contained oodles of money to be distributed to these centers.

In addition, these federally qualified health centers get higher reimbursements from entities like Medicaid and Medicare than are generally available to other practitioners and health care organizations.  They also get free malpractice coverage under federal law.  They occupy a privileged position in the pecking order established by the federal government.

The implications of this arrangement is that Guilford County taxpayers would no longer be subsidizing Guilford Adult Health and Guilford Child Health.  Instead, federal and state taxpayers would be primarily funding this new entity via FQHC funding and enhanced reimbursements from public insurance programs.  And this is apparently all with the consent of the county manager and, I presume, the current chair of the board of county commissioners.

But let's not be confused.  Our local public health department would still be providing many clinical services to individual patients.  It would still be seeing patients with insurance; billing insurance; and collecting from insurance.  These two entities described above, however, would be removed from its budget.

Of course, this new arrangement will assure that a team of administrators for the local FQHC will enjoy handsome earnings running the new entity.  Patients with insurance will continue to be diverted from the truly private medical sector.   

There is one minor catch.  The federal level of funding for these newly established centers has not yet apparently been solidified, as far as I know.  I seem to recall reading that it depends on certain actions being considered by Congress.  Correct me if I am wrong about that.

In any case, never fear.  Control over the healthcare for this group of patients is merely being transferred from one level of government to another.  Let's all celebrate.  And in the meantime, take some gratuitous shots at anyone who suggests reducing the county health department budget.

Pawlenty Announcement

What the Guilford County Health Department Must Do According to State Law

When I presented before the Guilford County Commissioners on Monday night on behalf of Conservatives for Guilford County (C4GC), my topic was the Guilford County Public Health Department. 

Guilford County is on the verge of a serious fiscal crisis.  It was my task to identify potential budget reductions to assist the commissioners. 

I think the goal of C4GC is to set the county's fiscal ship on a better course--while simultaneously avoiding the need for a tax increase.  A tax increase would be quite harmful to those on limited incomes, the unemployed, the underemployed, and those who generally have less financial resources.  That would amount to lots of folks in Guilford County.  It would also negatively impact job creation and job recruitment. 

It turns out that state law requires relatively little of county health departments in North Carolina.  The state-mandated activities (or categories of activities) in which the Guilford County Department of Public Health must be engaged are as follows:

1. Vital records registration

2. Food, lodging and institutional sanitation

3. Communicable disease control and immunizations

4. Individual on-site water supply, and

5. Sanitary sewage collection, treatment and disposal.

Some of these functions are primarily regulatory in nature.  But these five activities are considered to be the core of public health in the state of North Carolina.  Every county health department in the state must perform these functions.  My belief is that the state adopted these limited requirements because it recognized public health as a discipline that is primarily intended to look after the health status of communities or populations. 

Public health, as a general rule, seeks to make interventions that will positively impact the health of entire populations or communities.  Primary care or clinical medicine do not represent the true public health tradition-- and in fact are directly contrary to that tradition in many ways. 

Yes, there have been factors that have illegitimately enlarged the mission of public health over the years.  Those factors have primarily been political.  And I should point out that the Guilford County Public Health Department likely engages in a number of worthy, legitimate public health activities that the state does not mandate.

But because of a variety of circumstances, including a local political/media culture that has been quite profligate, the county now faces a fiscal crisis.  It has to make some tough choices.

I suggested to the commissioners that every single budgetary line item in the health department budget that does not involve the above five functions or activities represents a potential reduction.  In total, these reductions would represent a savings of $12.2 million from the current fiscal year budget, or $9.3 million from the budget submitted by County Manager Brenda Jones-Fox.  It is up to the commissioners as to which line item reductions, if any, they adopt.

But the aggregate message of C4GC's meeting Monday night was quite clear.  It is quite possible for the commissioners to get our fiscal house in order, and to avoid a tax increase.  They just have to make some tough choices. 

Skip Alston's Morality

At the conclusion of the county commissioners' meeting Thursday night, Skip Alston made some remarks.  He indicated that he had no interest in considering the potential budgetary reductions identified by Conservatives for Guilford County.  He alleged that the suggestions were "not well thought out", and were of "no value to me or to the citizens".

But he went a couple of steps beyond those statements.  He also said that Conservatives for Guilford County, with its proposals, espoused "immoral" and "unjust" practices or values.

We all need to understand that Alston's concept of justice or morality is highly dependent on governmental programs being funded at a certain level.  Of course, some of us would dispute passionately that concept of justice or morality.  But Alston is a big-time liberal, and always has been, regardless of the appearances he has sought to create over the last couple of years.

Perhaps this is an appropriate time to review some of the evidence regarding Alston's own concept of morality and justice.  Here are a few examples:

1. St. James Homes

Alston previously served as the property manager for St. James Homes, a low-income housing community.  He derived income from that role.  But it turns out the city of Greensboro had provided some funding for that particular development.  He was benefiting financially from that funding even though he serves as a principal on the Simkins PAC which endorses candidates for the Greensboro City Council.  A moral person would foreswear any income drawn directly or indirectly from a governmental entity if he or she held a position of power and influence over that entity.

But there is another aspect to the St. James story.  Former local blogger Ben Holder identified that a safety hazard existed with some steps at the complex.  In fact, a resident had apparently been injured because of it.  But Ben had to hound Alston to fix the steps; and it was truly remarkable that the county commissioner was finally issued a citation by the city of Greensboro over the matter.

Allen Johnson recounted the remarkable number of violations over the years. But none dared to call the commissioner a slumlord. 

2. The Downtown Hotel

Some readers will recall the series of events that took place early last year regarding the proposed downtown hotel.  Alston was positioned to earn a hefty brokerage commission from a proposal that had to get voted upon by both the Greensboro City Council and the Board of County Commissioners. 

It was reported that Alston had threatened one or more Greensboro City Council members over this matter.  Given his role as chairman of the county board, and also as a principal in the Simkins PAC, this certainly raised eyebrows because of the influence he wields.  Mike Weaver and Dennis Quaintance filed a lawsuit that alleged, among other things, that Alston violated state conflict of interest statutes.  The matter raised questions as to whether the crime of extortion was committed.

3. Action Greensboro Donation to Simkins PAC

Some of us recall that Action Greensboro made an illegal $5,000 donation to the Simkins PAC during the 2008 election cycle; and the Simkins PAC illegally accepted it.  Action Greensboro is a non-profit, and is a key part of the Greensboro Partnership.  The donation was made to help get the bonds passed that were on the ballot that year.  The Simkins PAC, in fact, did endorse the bonds after receiving this donation. 

It should be noted that Mr. Alston has been the treasurer of the Simkins PAC.  In recent weeks, he has repeatedly trumpeted his 19 years of experience on the Board of County Commissioners.  He is not a babe in the woods.  He is not a political neophyte.

One cannot help but wonder whether Alston knew it was against the law for the PAC to accept such a large donation from a non-profit.  Many folks are quite aware that organizations with tax-exempt status cannot make political contributions.  It would be difficult for me to believe that Alston, with all his years of political experience, did not know that.  But he has responsibility as treasurer of the PAC to assure that matters are handled correctly and in compliance with the law.

Ironically, the same county bonds Action Greensboro was trying to get passed by paying off the Simkins PAC are now some of the major contributors to the fiscal crisis the county is facing.  Alston's PAC helped created the current budget crisis with its support of the bonds.  

The above three instances offer only a snapshot of Alston's long public career.  It only offers a brief glimpse of his political and professional activities.  Perhaps there is much more that one could cite.

The premise Alston advances-- that morality or justice depends upon funding of certain governmental programs-- is politically convenient.  But I will leave it up to the reader as to whether the three instances cited-- St. James Homes, the downtown hotel and the illegal PAC donation-- properly reflect the principles of morality and justice. 

Does the Greensboro City Council Listen? Part 2

Tony Wilkins has an interesting post.  There was a fellow at the city council meeting this week who confronted council members and accused them of not listening to landfill opponents.  It was a whiny, unfair diatribe. 

But Tony reports this same individual has had a professional role raising funds for a charitable organization that has been extracting monies from taxpayers for its purposes.  And the city council has provided the wherewithal for some of the funding of this particular organization-- to the tune of $560,000.

Consider those points as you watch this performance:

Discussion Begins on Reducing Size of Board of County Commissioners

Jordan Green had a good post earlier this week suggesting that the effort to reduce the size of the Guilford Board of County Commissioners has begun.  And the News and Record had a front page article this morning (unposted) indicating that Commissioner Billy Yow had pushed the idea at last night's meeting.

It is very encouraging that this change is being advanced, and that it is being reported objectively.

Readers will recall that the enlargement of the board was engineered by local Democrats in 1991 to facilitate their longstanding dominance.  And it worked.

But let's not forget.  We also need to remove all vestiges of gerrymandering from the district seats.  We need to reduce even the racial gerrymandering-- to the extent that we can under the law. 

What are Obama's Jewish Supporters Thinking Now?

Even though they had ample reason to believe that he would not be a strong supporter of Israel during the 2008 presidential campaign, Jewish Americans supported Barack Obama for president by large pluralities.

For example, one of his major backers had been Penny Pritzker of Chicago, whose Jewish family founded the Hyatt hotel chain.

One can only wonder what they all are thinking now.

Obamacare: It's Mitt's Fault

Michael Cannon, Cato Institute:

Romney bears as much responsibility for ObamaCare as any Democrat, and all the Republican health policy boilerplate in the world won’t change that fact...

If Republicans pick Romney as their standard-bearer, they will be choosing someone who, as the Wall Street Journal editorializes, is either a leftist on health care, too clueless to realize the Left played him for a fool, or so unprincipled that he doesn’t care.  The Obama campaign would like nothing more.  The attack ads write themselves.  Romney would become a laughingstock — if he isn’t already — and would drag the ObamaCare-repeal effort down with him.

Bin Laden: Dead or Alive

More Reverbations from the Spending Reform Summit

The News and Record had a good editorial this morning.  An apparently unposted front page article also discusses in some depth the issue of Guilford County's declining fund balances and its bond projects. 

Scott Yost in the Rhino has a good article also.

George Hartzman succeeded at the task of focusing the attention of attendees on the issue of escalating bond debt, and on the county's spending down our savings.  This, of course, is a recipe for default; and a sign of an impending fiscal crisis.

The question is whether the commissioners will try to fix the problem by raising taxes.  That would hurt a lot of people who are on fixed incomes, and the many folks who are unemployed and underemployed.  It will hurt those who have less-- because they have less expendable income.  It will also impact job creation and recruitment.