Political Animal
Blog
Wondered why I was feeling cranky today (other than having to deal with the release of another Ryan Budget!), and my wife notified me I had missed Monday’s National Napping Day! When I get done with blogging, it may be time to hang with the Sandman.
Here are some final items of the day:
* Ashley Judd telling her friends she is definitely running for the Senate.
* New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez, abandoning one of the two policy positions (the other being her support for Medicaid expansion) that I liked about her, signals she’ll sign bill boosting the state’s already lavish film/TV subsidies. I love Breaking Bad, but this is getting ridiculous.
* New PPP poll of PA shows Gov. Tom Corbett’s popularity cratering in a big way.
* At Ten Miles Square, Aaron Carroll notes these we’ll-expand-Medicaid-if-we-can-privatize-it deals are going to cost taxpayers a lot of money, which kinda puts a dent in the GOP’s claims of fiscal responsibility.
* At College Guide, Daniel Luzer reports growing backlash against creationist textbooks among evangelical homeschooling families.
And in non-political news:
* Looks like Twinkies could be back on the shelves by this summer.
To end the day, here’s another rare Delaney & Bonnie video, a performance of “Good Thing” from 1972, not long before they got divorced and broke up the band.
Selah.
Facebook
Twitter
boatboy_srq on March 12, 2013 5:38 PM:
* At Ten Miles Square, Aaron Carroll notes these we’ll-expand-Medicaid-if-we-can-privatize-it deals are going to cost taxpayers a lot of money, which kinda puts a dent in the GOP’s claims of fiscal responsibility.
After Supply-Side, Trickle-Down, Deficits Don't Matter and other fantastical approaches to budgetary policy, that ship has sunk already and dents are the least of the concerns.
Peter C on March 12, 2013 6:00 PM:
I think running Ashley Judd against Mitch McConnell is a great idea, especially when the alternative has seemed lately to be to let people like him run unopposed.
I'll bet Mitch will be too afraid to debate her.
cwolf on March 12, 2013 7:04 PM:
* Looks like Twinkies could be back on the shelves by this summer.
Why did I think of the Keystone Pipeline when I first read about the Twinkie repreive?
Keith M Ellis on March 12, 2013 10:37 PM:
If state film subsidies ever do make sense, then New Mexico's are probably an example of it. Unlike many others, the subsidy there is tied to local employment and arguably therefore has helped to build an actual local film/TV infrastructure, with a lot of the lower-level technical positions filled by locals.
This is in contrast to the subsidies in most other states which are more unconditional and where, in most cases, there's been a lot of production but it's all imported labor and pretty much the only thing that's the draw is the subsidy.
New Mexico has been a popular production location for decades before subsidies, so the conditional subsidies have helped build a local industry that will at least partly survive without them.
Even so, it's unlikely that this produces a net gain for state tax revenues and the impact on the overall economy is relatively small, even though total production budgets are so large that people tend to think in those terms with multiplier effects. Unfortunately, the reality is much more modest.
All that said, there are considerations beyond the economic bottom line. New Mexico's economy lacks diversity and helping diversify it a bit is a good thing. One could argue that there would be better choices for different purposes, but this is also a very high-profile industry, both within and outside the state, and that is important to a lot of people. And, incidentally, prior to this period almost all films/TV in New Mexico were those that featured the landscape, usually in westerns. That subsidy has helped bring production to New Mexico that's independent of those things and helped filmmakers see it as a versatile locale for a great many diverse locations. Within the context of the local film industry, that's a good thing.
Film subsidies take a lot of criticism as the poster-children of this local industrial policy of nothing but tax breaks and a race to the bottom. And many of those criticisms apply; but I think that in some ways it's unique and, in any case, a lot of times much of the impetus for these initiatives is not pure economic analysis and the bottom-line, but a complex mix of motivations, often including the desire to promote an already-existing well-liked aspect of the local economy.
jkl; on March 13, 2013 8:33 AM:
Let's keep this in the news:
Republican Representative Paul Ryan made this incredible statement as he announced his very cruel/austere budget:
Ryan blurted out, on video:
"This to us is something that we're not going to give up on, because we're not going to give up on DESTROYING THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE."
Link/video clip:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/03/12/1193521/-Paul-Ryan-We-re-not-going-to-give-up-on-destroying-the-health-care-system
Funny how underlying intent of politicians presents itself as it is exposed in their specific and elective speech. I mean--Ryan could have said anything, and he said that!!!!!! Freud would have a field day.
Americans want & need a health care system, and Republicans are intent on destroying it for the American people. Now it is out there.
May every Democratic candidate use this videoclip as he and she run for office everywhere in this great country.
Paul Ryan will forever remind me of George E. Bush and Bushlexia.