Locke

RALEIGH — With the American Lung Association’s latest national rankings on air quality due out today, John Locke Foundation analysts urge caution in interpreting the association’s “biased” data. “There is…

RALEIGH — The federal US highway program passed in 1998 has resulted in a substantial improvement in overall road conditions but at considerable cost, according to a report released today…

RALEIGH — Just in time for its 15th anniversary celebration Friday, the John Locke Foundation has begun a major expansion of its flagship publication, Carolina Journal — including new local…

RALEIGH — North Carolina’s largest public policy think tank has launched a major project to expand its activities, influence, and support in the state’s largest metropolitan area: Charlotte. Residents of…

RALEIGH — Gov. Mike Easley’s proposed state budget uses higher taxes to close the vast majority of an $1.1 billion budget deficit, itself created primarily by the governor’s proposed new…

Despite a $1.3 billion deficit, Gov. Mike Easley will propose up to 6 percent higher spending in his 2005-06 budget, even with small proposed savings in most agencies. Medicaid and education spending have grown rapidly, and will continue apace. Instead, the governor plans to keep the temporary half-cent sales tax and add a large cigarette tax to pay for higher spending. This is no way to address what the Fiscal Research Division calls a structural budget deficit.

RALEIGH — A major cause of North Carolina’s continuing budget woes is rapid growth in Medicaid spending, where the state has some of the highest expenditures in the South, according…

States have three direct policy levers to control Medicaid growth: eligibility, services, and payments. North Carolina’s mix of policies has led to some of the highest costs in the South, but the Blue Ribbon Commission on Medicaid Reform would make it even costlier. Tennessee and Mississippi, the two Southern states with higher per capita costs in 2000, have since made significant changes. Georgia and Virginia present different ways to reduce costs, while a 2001 report for the General Assembly presented largely unexploited savings.

During the 2005 session, state lawmakers are expected to take up the issue of how to comply with court rulings in the Leandro case. It is important to discard widespread misperceptions. First, Leandro does not require taxpayers to spend more money on public education. Second, public-school funding does not differ significantly across counties when all spending is included. Third, the small gap that remains is shrinking, not growing, and is unlikely to explain differences in student outcomes. Finally, local funds are a reasonable way to compensate for elevated labor costs in counties with high housing prices.

RALEIGH — Lawmakers are reportedly planning to discuss an expensive state program next year to respond to state court decisions in the Leandro case, but many appear to be operating…