Earlier this month, it was finally decided who would complete the Northern Beltway widening project. This $115 million construction project was originally bid early in 2009 and was awarded to Las Vegas Paving. Las Vegas Paving was previously awarded this project by the Clark County Commission twice, even though they were not the low bidder. Fisher Sand & Gravel, who was the apparent low bidder, was given $5 million to not do the job, after 2 years in court and commission meetings.
Now there are lots of variables involved with this case, bid protests, subcontractor challenges, questionable ethics, union partisan and of course legal battles. What is often overlooked is the impact that this two year delay has had on Las Vegas. First, the freeway has not been widened; causing traffic problems to persist for residents in that area and they still have to wait and put up with the traffic delays associated with the construction. Next, is the economic impact; with one of the worst economies in the country and leading nation in unemployment, we could have definitely used the work and the fiscal impact it would bring with it. Additionally, you have the indirect costs associated with the project being delayed; the cost to the county to defend their decision, the time lost from employees in court and meetings. Finally, you have the cost to the tax payer. All of Clark County’s costs are really paid by the tax payer. The approximate $5 million more for the project and the $2 million settlement are ultimately paid for by the tax payer.
It’s not all about the cost to the tax payer; the underlying theme is that this case was handled, not just in court, but in federal court. Where does a federal court get jurisdiction in a matter pertaining to a county road? In a contract dispute, state courts would have jurisdiction but there is no contract. The Clark County Commissioners were well within the power to award the contract to whomever they deemed in the best interest of the county. This matter never should have seen the inside of the courtroom, let alone a federal courtroom. Bids for public works are very specific and state, more times than not, that the county reserves the right to reject any and all bids for any reason. They also reserve the right to select the bid that is most advantageous to their (county) interests in selecting the most responsive, responsible bidder. This is not a matter for the courts to decide, but the Clark County Commission’s matter to decide, which would have saved the tax payers money over the years. It’s another case of federal intervention into a state issue. Does the state have any sovereignty left?
Thursday, September 29, 2011
Thursday, September 8, 2011
Romney campaigns in Vegas
With Presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s stop in Las Vegas yesterday, Nevada has officially become an important state in the Presidential race. Recently, we have seen Vice President Biden in town and President Obama has made a number of stops here. Predictions show that the 2012 Presidential election will come down to seven states, Nevada being one of them.
Candidate Romney came to Las Vegas, which is leading the nation in unemployment, to unveil his jobs plan. Mitt Romney produced an economic plan, in book sized form, that he claims would create over 11 million jobs and lead to 4% annual growth in his first term. The highest annual rate we have seen since 2007 is 3%, which was 2010.
It’s not a big surprise that Romney picked Las Vegas, which has an unemployment rate of 14%, the largest city in the state leading the nation in unemployment at just under 13%. His plan calls for cutting corporate tax rates and eliminating taxes on savings, investments, capital gains and estates. Additionally, his plan calls for free trade agreements, oil leases and domestic energy exploration. Of the five “executive orders” Romney proposed, eliminating regulations and speeding up the permitting of oil leases would help create jobs.
Will Mitt Romney’s plan work? Will it help out our unemployment problem in Nevada and Las Vegas? The only way we will know for sure is if Romney gets the GOP nomination and defeats President Obama in November 2012. His proposals are nothing new, we have heard these before and they will help spur job growth. Will they help in Nevada? They could not hurt our job growth. Only cutting the corporate tax rate 10% is a good start, but a lower rate would induce more companies to stay in the country. These companies move oversees because it becomes to cheaper to make the products in another country and ship it here, than to make it here and pay the taxes. Rolling back regulations would go a long way to increasing job growth. Mindless regulations and reporting and tracking required by the government for compliance costs millions of dollars a year to Nevada businesses; money that could be invested in research, equipment and labor instead of government reporting. Reducing the tax burden on all Americans has proven to help stimulate the economy by giving everyone more money in their pockets to spend or save how they want to, not how the government tells them.
With the hospitality industry representing the largest employer in the state and construction was representing a good number, until the economy turns around Las Vegas will continue to struggle in those areas. Nevada does have a business friendly climate, so the focus should be on enticing manufacturers to relocate to the state. Another underutilized industry would our mining industry. Nevada is the home to many precious metals and has a rich mining history, it’s time to restore that legacy and put Nevadan’s to work mining the materials other states and countries want and need.
There are things that can be done nationally to help our unemployment and our economy, which is to get out of the way and stop taxing and regulating businesses with frivolous rules and regulations. Let the states determine their own jobs plan, every state is different and requires a unique solution. One size fits all laws cannot apply to 50 unique situations.
Please see my examiner article here for links to sources used.
Candidate Romney came to Las Vegas, which is leading the nation in unemployment, to unveil his jobs plan. Mitt Romney produced an economic plan, in book sized form, that he claims would create over 11 million jobs and lead to 4% annual growth in his first term. The highest annual rate we have seen since 2007 is 3%, which was 2010.
It’s not a big surprise that Romney picked Las Vegas, which has an unemployment rate of 14%, the largest city in the state leading the nation in unemployment at just under 13%. His plan calls for cutting corporate tax rates and eliminating taxes on savings, investments, capital gains and estates. Additionally, his plan calls for free trade agreements, oil leases and domestic energy exploration. Of the five “executive orders” Romney proposed, eliminating regulations and speeding up the permitting of oil leases would help create jobs.
Will Mitt Romney’s plan work? Will it help out our unemployment problem in Nevada and Las Vegas? The only way we will know for sure is if Romney gets the GOP nomination and defeats President Obama in November 2012. His proposals are nothing new, we have heard these before and they will help spur job growth. Will they help in Nevada? They could not hurt our job growth. Only cutting the corporate tax rate 10% is a good start, but a lower rate would induce more companies to stay in the country. These companies move oversees because it becomes to cheaper to make the products in another country and ship it here, than to make it here and pay the taxes. Rolling back regulations would go a long way to increasing job growth. Mindless regulations and reporting and tracking required by the government for compliance costs millions of dollars a year to Nevada businesses; money that could be invested in research, equipment and labor instead of government reporting. Reducing the tax burden on all Americans has proven to help stimulate the economy by giving everyone more money in their pockets to spend or save how they want to, not how the government tells them.
With the hospitality industry representing the largest employer in the state and construction was representing a good number, until the economy turns around Las Vegas will continue to struggle in those areas. Nevada does have a business friendly climate, so the focus should be on enticing manufacturers to relocate to the state. Another underutilized industry would our mining industry. Nevada is the home to many precious metals and has a rich mining history, it’s time to restore that legacy and put Nevadan’s to work mining the materials other states and countries want and need.
There are things that can be done nationally to help our unemployment and our economy, which is to get out of the way and stop taxing and regulating businesses with frivolous rules and regulations. Let the states determine their own jobs plan, every state is different and requires a unique solution. One size fits all laws cannot apply to 50 unique situations.
Please see my examiner article here for links to sources used.
Saturday, September 3, 2011
Biden campaigns in Vegas
Last week, Vice President Joe Biden was in Las Vegas touting the need for green technology and the importance for government investment (taxation) in the fledgling industry. An industry that doesn’t rely on the free market but instead relies on tax payer funded subsidies. Alternative energy is on everyone’s radar with our “dependence” on foreign oil and the recent skyrocketing gas prices. Nevada is seen a possible testing ground for this technology, is it because of our abundance of sun and wind? Or could it be that over 80% of Nevada is “owned” by the federal government and since the fed spends so much on these green technologies it would be a logical place? It’s not because Nevada puts to use its natural resources, after all we don’t even keep the precious metals we are “allowed” to mine in our own state (but that’s a different story).
Nellis Air Force Base is running a solar farm and expects to save approximately $1 million a year on electricity. Before you jump to tout the success of the solar farm, it only supplies about 30% of the electrical needs of the base and cost $100 million. That means is would take 100 years for the investment to pay for itself and it would still require more electricity than the farm could supply. That does not sound like efficient alternative energy.
Other forms of alternative energy have the same needs; they need tax payer money to be economically viable and do not produce enough energy. While I will agree that this is important technology and should be researched and developed, I cannot agree with taking money from the American people to provide corporate welfare to some government favored businesses. How many of the great inventions and discoveries were made by the government? How many of those were created by government subsidies? Did Eli Whitney rely on government money to develop the cotton gin? Did Wilbur and Orville need the government to keep upstarts from trying to develop the airplane? The list could go on and on of society changing inventions that came about by a person and a vision. A vision of creating a better way to do something and the profits that comes along with it.
Nevada may have a leg up in the abundance of solar energy but it cannot become economically feasible until private industries take the lead in research and development. When the government, through tax payer money, is bankrolling your research there is no real incentive to develop new technology, you already have the money and if you develop the product you lose the funding. Free market competition is the only way to create new technology and the government has never created anything it didn’t first take from someone else.
Nellis Air Force Base is running a solar farm and expects to save approximately $1 million a year on electricity. Before you jump to tout the success of the solar farm, it only supplies about 30% of the electrical needs of the base and cost $100 million. That means is would take 100 years for the investment to pay for itself and it would still require more electricity than the farm could supply. That does not sound like efficient alternative energy.
Other forms of alternative energy have the same needs; they need tax payer money to be economically viable and do not produce enough energy. While I will agree that this is important technology and should be researched and developed, I cannot agree with taking money from the American people to provide corporate welfare to some government favored businesses. How many of the great inventions and discoveries were made by the government? How many of those were created by government subsidies? Did Eli Whitney rely on government money to develop the cotton gin? Did Wilbur and Orville need the government to keep upstarts from trying to develop the airplane? The list could go on and on of society changing inventions that came about by a person and a vision. A vision of creating a better way to do something and the profits that comes along with it.
Nevada may have a leg up in the abundance of solar energy but it cannot become economically feasible until private industries take the lead in research and development. When the government, through tax payer money, is bankrolling your research there is no real incentive to develop new technology, you already have the money and if you develop the product you lose the funding. Free market competition is the only way to create new technology and the government has never created anything it didn’t first take from someone else.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)