Matt Yglesias suggests that Tax-Increment Financing (TIF) is a good mechanism for encouraging the development of abandoned property. I disagree. TIF is mostly a mechanism for transferring taxpayer dollars to politically-connected private developers, and it is intimately connected to the problems of eminent domain abuse.

TIF is one of those ideas that looks reasonable when you first encounter it (and, indeed, seemed reasonable when California invented it in the 1950s) but gets worse and worse the more you learn about it. The theory behind TIF is that local governments take out bonds that are paid back out of the increased tax revenue generated by a new development financed by those bonds. So, for example, if Wal-Mart wants to build a new store on land that was previously a low-revenue residential neighborhood, the city government might issue bonds worth several million dollars, give them to Wal-Mart to help build its store, and then repay the bonds out of the increased revenue generated by the Wal-Mart.

There are two problems with this approach. One is that the concept of “new tax revenue” isn’t as simple as it seems. It’s true in a trivial sense that the city government is now getting tax revenue from that particular site that it wasn’t getting before. But the reality is that Wal-Mart almost certainly would have built its store somewhere, and so some tax jurisdiction in the general area is losing revenue it would received but for the TIF.

Second, the way the TIF process is set up in Missouri (and Missouri is far from unique) creates a kind of revenue death spiral, where municipalities compete to give large companies ever-larger TIF packages (and eminent domain) to lure them to the state. The result is that large, politically connected developers wind up paying much less in taxes than they would in a world without the ability for such favoritism. Indeed, a lot of large retailers have become expert at playing this kind of game, staying only as long as required by their TIF agreement before picking up stakes and moving to another municipality, where they can get another round of taxpayer handouts.

Presumably, TIF proponents would say that this is an abuse of the TIF concept, and it is. But I’ve seen no plausible proposals to fix the process. The reality is that when you give local governments broad discretion to play favorites, they’re going to adopt policies that favor those with the most political influence. Those tend not to be struggling entrepreneurs that are trying to put down roots in a marginal neighborhood. Rather, they tend to be big companies that bulldoze marginal neighborhoods, kick out the poor people that live in them, and replace their homes with overpriced condos the previous residents can’t afford.

Which brings me to my final point: it’s also important to understand that in most states, TIF is inextricably intertwined with eminent domain. Here in Missouri, the preliminary steps for approving a TIF district—commissioning a study to determine that the area is “blighted” (and the firms that do these studies always conclude that the area is blighted)—are identical to the steps for approving the use of eminent domain. TIF and eminent domain are frequently offered as a package to potential developers.

Indeed, I don’t know about the U Street neighborhood specifically, but I do know that in many areas, the threat of eminent domain is one of the major impediments to organic growth of urban neighborhoods. Entrepreneurs who are foolish enough to try to start a new business in a marginal neighborhood without the city’s explicit blessing are sitting ducks for future confiscation of their businesses after the neighborhood begins to prosper. This creates a huge disincentive to develop abandoned property, and creates the illusion that only active city “redevelopment” can revitalize neighborhoods. In reality, the threat of “redevelopment” is one of the major drags on organic urban revitalization.

–Tim Lee

The temperance movement marches on — as does the book. This excerpt picks up where this one left off. Thanks again for the helpful comments you’ve been providing so far. The book is improved thanks to them…

In the early 1800s, the state of medical technology offered the suffering few options for pain relief. Essentially, all a doctor could do was use drugs to help a patient get high. Even the most temperate-minded were reluctant to decry an evil of such obvious necessity. But when relief that didn’t come with inebriation became available, attitudes began to change—or, more accurately, attitudes and interests that had been kept in check by the undeveloped state of medicine were finally unleashed.

Aspirin, X-ray machines, and other commonplace elements of today’s medical arsenal wouldn’t be around until the very end of the 19th century. The lack of an effective product, however, never stopped a good American businessman from trying to make a buck. Indeed, a person of that time with a headache, an infection, or any other malady had a bewildering array of supposed remedies to choose from. The commercialization of pain relief had allowed drug control to slip from the hands of the medical profession.

(more…)

Andrew Sullivan makes a very important point about Bush, McCain and the subject of torture. Two points, actually. The first is that Bush doesn’t think McCain was tortured:

The torture that was deployed against McCain emerges in all the various accounts. It involved sleep deprivation, the withholding of medical treatment, stress positions, long-time standing, and beating. Sound familiar?

According to the Bush administration’s definition of torture, McCain was therefore not tortured.

(more…)

“If I don’t want to pray, I don’t go to church,” Ellison said. “If you don’t want to smoke, don’t come in here.” West Virginia bar owners defy county smoking ban

Rocket scientists say interstellar travel is impractical. I’m not going to put my lot in with rocket scientists

Bumbling TSA inspector grounds nine jets

Member of Denver mayor’s Marijuana Policy Review Panel advises no busts during DNC convention (when, coincidentally, I’ll be in the city)

Jackson and Del Toro will collaborate on Hobbit scripts

Domenico DeMarco on the art of making pizza

– Jacob Grier

It’s a little on the old side, but Scott McClellan’s accusation that the White House has been feeding talking points to Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity is interesting, if not surprising:

Rachel Maddow’s take here strikes me as completely backwards. She says she’s not made at Fox News because “they pledge allegiance to nobody other than the bank at which they cash their paychecks every week.” But she says she’s mad at the government because “it’s supposed to be illegal in America to propagandize the American people. It is supposed to be illegal for our government to covertly choose some sort of press organ that is represented to the American people as if it is a press organ and is feeding us stuff that is actually propaganda from our government.”

I have no idea what she’s talking about here. Certainly it would be objectionable if the government secretly owned and operated Fox News, but I don’t see how sending talking points to Sean Hannity or anyone else is illegal or even unethical. The Bush administration wants to get its perspective out there, and it of course does everything it can to feed sympathetic reporters with information that will help them make the White House’s case. Sending Sean Hannity talking points is awfully low on the list of unethical Bush White House activities.

Rather, the blame here lies with the “journalists” who betray the trust their viewers place in them by parroting the government’s talking points without disclosing that that’s where they came from. As far as I know, that’s not illegal, but it certainly ought to be embarrassing, and anyone who actually cares about getting “fair and balanced” news should avoid watching the programs of journalists who behave that way.

–Tim Lee

If I were the Obama campaign, I’d be getting pretty worried about recent polling trends. The latest tally now shows him with a razor-thin 275-250 lead in the electoral college. It has Obama winning Indiana, which seems flatly impossible given that Indiana has gone Republican for decades and went for Bush by 21 percent in 2004. Similarly, the map has Virginia a dead heat, but it too has been consistently Republican in recent decades. Northern Virginia is growing, but not that fast. Put Indiana and Virginia in the Republican column and you get a 274-264 win.

Matt Yglesias likes to mock the idea that “only” winning by a thin margin is bad news for Obama, but I think there’s more to the concept than he gives credit for. Obama is a black guy with a funny name and a polarizing pastor. John McCain is a white war hero. There’s plenty of raw material for the Republican smear machine to work with. Political campaigns are not fought with policy briefs and debating points. They’re fought with character assasination and appeals to tribal loyalty. The white war hero has a large, immediate advantage in that kind of competition.

Now, Obama’s an extremely talented politician and a likeable guy, and he may very well find ways to neutralize these kinds of attacks. But I wouldn’t bet on it. His blowout victory in his 2004 Senate race and his relatively genteel race with Hillary Clinton certainly haven’t given him any practice.

So if Obama is barely holding his own now, at a time when McCain is running an incredibly unfocused campaign and before the really vicious smears have come out, he’s going to be in trouble once the McCain campaign gets its act together and the 527s start doing their work. We should remember that at this point in the race John Kerry was predicted to win by an even wider 301-213 margin, without improbable victories in Virginia and Indiana. We know how that one turned out.

–Tim Lee

David Zetland has a great post in defense of bottled water. Many people consider bottled water to be silly when compared with drinking water from the tap, but Zetland points out that a more apt comparison might be to drinking pop:

It is beyond question that we have a very serious obesity problem in the U.S., and we have accompanying health problems. I would love to see every one of those 12 oz soft drinks replaced by bottled water. And remember that many of those soft drinks are also packaged in plastic bottles.

My take is that every can of pop replaced by a bottle of water is a very, very good thing. You can’t get fat drinking water and you can’t get diabetes from drinking water, so we won’t have to pay for the health care costs from those problems. When those very real benefits are weighed against the costs listed at the beginning of this rant, I think bottle water wins by a wide margin.

This is consistent with my own experience. When I’m on a trip and I go into a convenience store looking for something to drink, I’m usually tempted to buy pop, but I’ll often opt for water instead because it’s healthier. If there were no bottled water in the store, I’d buy the pop. I’m sure lots of other people are the same way.

I guess the anti-bottled-water zealots would tell me I ought to carry a water bottle around and refill it in gas station restrooms. But the water wouldn’t be as cold that way, and gas station restrooms are disgusting. In the real world, bottled water is far more likely to substitute for less healthy bottled drinks, not tap water.

Hat tip: Joe

–Tim Lee

Brian Wesbury on inflationary dangers

Jerry Taylor and John White debate energy policy in this week’s L.A. Times Dust-Up

Dick Heller gets his gun permit

Australian mayor in trouble for inviting “ugly duckling” women to his masculine mining town

“The Waiter” on the differences between writing a blog and writing a book

New images from Watchmen

Jason Kuznicki finds a very cool retro pipe

Dog cloner case continues to get weirder

– Jacob Grier

I have a story in today’s Politico about Dr. Irshad Shaikh, a Pakistani immigrant caught up in the anthrax investigation. He’s now in Darfur, having been driven from the U.S., but finally won his citizenship after a seven year battle.

A movement of university heads is afoot.

“Ohio State President Gordon Gee is among 100 college presidents calling on lawmakers to consider lowering the drinking age from 21 to 18. The presidents contend current laws actually encourage dangerous binge drinking on campus.”

Fine with me, but can we keep the 18 year olds out of my local bar, at least? I’ll go to hell for saying that, but the culture of drinking is so backwards in this country that it takes people until the age of about 22 or so until they can do it with an ounce of grace and sit there and enjoy it instead of sucking Bud Light through a funnel and puking it back up. I did plenty of both those things, so I’m not judging, I’m just saying that until our nation can have an adult relationship with drinking I’d rather the kids stay out of my bar. I guess I could just choose a bar not popular with the kids, though — say, one that doesn’t offer $3 pitchers and dollar cans. Not that there’s anything wrong with $3 pitchers.

– Ryan

This’ll be interesting: In July, Prince George’s County police stormed a mayor’s home, handcuffed his mother-in-law and shot his two black labs after police themselves had delivered a package of marijuana to him that they now concede was intended for someone else. They took mad heat for it nationally; the FBI is involved; editorial boards are outraged.

The story began, though, on page one of the Post’s Metro section (with apologies if a local paper reported it even earlier) and it grew from there. Today’s Metro section holds a story on the front that has the potential to be even worse. The victim this time, however, is Latino and he — rather than his pets — was shot and killed after being beaten, according to two witnesses.

Police have alternately said that the victim reached either for the officer’s baton or for his gun. The cop was off duty, moonlighting as a security guard when he shot Manuel de Jesus Espina.

A difference (beyond race and class) in the two cases is that, in the mayor’s case, all the facts were stipulated by both sides. Here, it starts out as the cop’s word against the witnesses. Given the PG County cops’ record over the last few months — they also apparently strangled a suspect while in jail in July — that’s a dispute that can be won by the witnesses. It’ll be worth watching this story to see if it sinks into the muck at the bottom of the pond.

– Ryan

December 5 of this year will mark the 75th anniversary of the 21st Amendment’s ratification and the end of national Prohibition. To celebrate, Old Forester is crafting a limited edition Repeal Bourbon for release this winter:

“Repeal Bourbon is bottled from a special selection of Old Forester barrels that exhibited a more robust character that is similar to the Old Forester that was bottled during Prohibition,” added Chris Morris, Master Distiller for Old Forester. “The flavor, presented at Prohibition’s required 100 proof, is a full, deep, charred oak character that will appeal to bourbon-lovers everywhere.”

The tip comes from Jeffrey Morgenthaler, who in addition to writing one of the best cocktail blogs on the internet has been running a campaign to make Repeal Day a widely celebrated holiday. Read more about it at RepealDay.org and remember to raise a glass on December 5.

Bureaucrash celebrated last year with a party in Arlington, across the river from DC in protest of the city’s smoking ban. Inside the city things got a little rough…

– Jacob Grier

This is extremely unusual. You may remember Maher Arar, the Canadian man who was arrested on a stopover at JFK airport and sent to Syria where he was tortured for nearly a year. With the help of the Center for Constitutional Rights, he sued the U.S. government. The district court dismissed the case based on the state secrets privilege, saying that it could harm national security to even hear the case. A 2nd Circuit appeals court upheld that dismissal in a 2-1 decision.

Now here comes the unexpected part: the 2nd circuit has announced that it will reconsider the case en banc, which means all the judges on the appeals court will hear it and vote on it. What makes this truly surprising is that Arar’s attorney didn’t ask for it; the court granted the rehearing sua sponte, on its own. That is extraordinarily rare. It suggests that there were a number of judges on the circuit who agitated for the rehearing because they believe it was wrongly decided.

“We are very encouraged,” said CCR attorney Maria LaHood. “For the court to take such extraordinary action on its own indicates the importance the judges place on the case and means that Maher may finally see justice in this country. As the dissenting judge noted, the majority’s opinion gave federal officials the license to ‘violate constitutional rights with virtual impunity.’ Now the court has the opportunity to uphold the law and hold accountable the U.S. officials who sent Maher to be tortured.”

This could be a huge turning point in the law on such things. The state secrets privilege has for far too long been a means of covering up clearly illegal and barbaric actions by the government.

–Ed Brayton

After bailouts, Fed struggling with credibility

The Washington Post profiles Bob Barr

“I love ticks. They are highly evolved and utterly fascinating arachnids.” The Wild Party, a blog about urban entomology, is both creepy and fascinating.

British government urges butt clenches at the bus stop [Thanks, Baylen]

While in the U.S., men just buy butt pads

Starbucks not snobby enough for Australian palate

Chinese Democracy nearing release? There could be a Dr Pepper in your future

– Jacob Grier

Time to finish off the 19th Centurty. We pick up as the “crestfallen dude” is being escorted out of the courtroom…

Opium and alcohol are rather different experiences that don’t mix—either physically or psychically—which might account for the dude’s memory lapse. Thomas De Quincey, the popular author of the 1822 Confessions of an English Opium-Eater, describes it well: “The pleasure given by wine is always rapidly mounting…after which as rapidly it declines; that from opium, when once generated, is stationary for eight to ten hours: the first, to borrow a technical distinction from medicine, is a case of acute, the second of chronic, pleasure; the one is a flickering flame, the other a steady and equable glow. But the main distinction lies in this—that whereas wine disorders the mental faculties, opium, on the contrary (if taken in a proper manner), introduces amongst them the most exquisite order, legislation, and harmony.”

At the time, there was little research done exploring the relationship between opium use and drinking. But there was at least one noteworthy study: an 1872 look at the opium boom by the Massachusetts State Board of Health. The reason for the dramatic upswing in opiate use, it concluded, wasn’t the Chinese or the Civil War—it was the temperance movement.

(more…)

Since my home bar was among the things I had to leave behind when I moved from Virginia, I’m limited in my cocktail blogging right now. But since bacon and bourbon are two Agitator favorites, I thought a post about how to deliciously combine the two was the least I could offer. (Why would you want to put bacon in your bourbon? If you have to ask, this isn’t the post for you.)

Alcohol is very good at extracting flavors. It’s easy to use for infusions. Throw some raspberries in some gin, let it sit for a day or two, strain out the raspberries, and voila, you’ve got raspberry gin. Unfortunately, your raspberries are going to taste pretty nasty now. That’s fine for fruit, but who wants to waste bacon? Luckily, there’s a better way.

It’s unappetizingly called “fat-washing.” It works on the basic principle that most of the flavor elements in a fat are also soluble in alcohol. This means that instead of having to ruin good bacon in an infusion, you can just use the melted fat. I got to sample a use of this technique last month at Tales of the Cocktail, a fantastic annual convention of cocktail enthusiasts held in New Orleans every summer. I’m getting baconostalgic just thinking about it. This recipe comes from PDT in New York and it makes a bourbon with an intense, smoky aroma and a true bacon flavor.

(more…)

Kicking off day three of our vacation today. Regrettably, our “flightseeing” tour over Mt. McKinley was canceled due to crummy weather. But that gives me some time to write up a few highlights, observations, and random notes from the first couple days:

• On the flight from Minneapolis to Anchorage, I sat next to a rugged-looking guy. We got to chatting, and I explained I was on vacation, and was looking forward to visiting the art galleries and bohemian shops of Homer, the Kennai Fjords tour, etc. I then asked why he was headed to Alaska. He answered that he would be riding a motorcycle from Anchorage to Prudhoe Bay (a 1,000 mile trip), where he’d go out on a boat with his brother to remote islands to hunt caribou a bow and arrow. At which point I thought, “I am not a man.”

• I liked Anchorage. The guide books were a little down on the town, but there’s definitely some charm to it. We had dinner at a place called Sacks, which would hold its own in a trendy neighborhood in just about any other city in the country. I had salmon tempura rolls for an appetizer, which were crispy, salmony, and delicious. The Agitatrix was quite fond of her tomato-gorgonzola soup. My main dish was a duck breast salad, hers was a grilled calamari salad. Both were terrific. We had breakfast at a pretty good greasy spoon called the Snow Goose Cafe. Reindeer sausage is tasty. We had drinks and dinner with the head of the Alaska Cabaret, Hotel, and Restaurant Association and his wife, whom I met when I spoke in Kodiak a few years ago.
• The afternoon of our first day, we went to a sled dog demonstration. Highlight of the day. I didn’t realize that sled dogs are mutts. I always assumed they were Alaskan Huskies. One dog can pull about 1,000 pounds. Plucky little pooches. Pictures forthcoming. Depending on my Internet access, I may try to do some “Sunday Evening Sled Dog Blogging.”
• Sadly, Anchorage is still serviced by “Ted Stevens International Airport.” And judging by the letters to the editor in the newspapers up here, Alaska is still quite fond of ol’ “Uncle Ted.” I guess if he were constantly sending me expensive gifts at taxpayer expense, I’d be pretty fond my uncle, too. Also, on the subject of Alaskan politics, the state’s MILF-tastic governor is now in some trouble, too. Seems she or someone on her staff intervened to fire a state trooper who was in the midst of a custody battle with the governor’s sister. Thing is, the guy also deserved to be fired. He’d apparently made some death threats, tazed his 11-year-old son, and driven his squad car drunk. Seems like a non-scandal to me. But I’m not all that read up on it.
• The Alaska Railroad is a lot of fun. We took one of the glass-domed cars from Anchorage to Talkeetna yesterday. Didn’t see much wildlife, but the scenery was spectacular. We’ll be taking it again this afternoon from Talkeetna to Denali National Park.
• Talkeetna is quaint and touristy, but in a good way. It’s a town of 700 people, inspiration for the TV series Northern Exposure, and consists of three blocks of art galleries, coffee shops, restaurants, and adventure outfitters. This is also the best place to book a flight to see Mt. McKinley, so there are about a half-dozen companies that will take you up in a little bi-plane for a couple of hours. Our flight was supposed to include a landing on a glacier, but as I mentioned, the damned weather got in the way. We’re hoping to reschedule one from Denali National Park. The best thing I’ve eaten so far in Alaska is a grilled salmon taco at a little trailer stand just off of Main Street, here. Also, the Roadhouse restaurant serves sourdough pancakes that are bigger than your face. Even if you have a huge face.
• Yesterday’s activity was a jet-boat tour of the Susitna, Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers, all three of which converge near here. It’s kinda’ cool because they’re three very distinct rivers. One is packed with sand bars, one with downed trees and large logs, and the other is bright green with glacial silt. All three are hopping with spawning silver salmon. The boat glides over them like an oversized waverunner. We saw about a dozen bald eagles, but not much else in the way of wildlife. But still lots of fun.
• Rental cars in Alaska are ridiculously expensive. I’m told this is because of one particularly ornery legislator who owns several Avis franchises in Alaska. The guy apparently pissed off enough of his colleagues that they hit rental cars with a eight percent sales tax, an additional 11 percent tax for renting at the airport, and a $5 per day rental fee. There’s also an additional 10 percent tax if you rent the car in Anchorage. Not the most tourist-friendly policy.

I’ll have some photos next week. Earlier if we have the Intertubes in Denali.

More temperance. This section follows after this one…

Jill Lepore sums up the conventional understanding of why American drinking collapsed beginning in the 1830s in a 2007 New Yorker article. “If you were to look at a map, and chart these changes, you’d see that they follow the course of the nation’s growing network of canals and railroads. The canal or railroad arrives, and the people join churches; the people join churches, and they drink less. How do historians account for these correlations? The answer, at first, seems obvious: preachers spread the Gospel; the same boats and trains that carried cash crops from farms to towns brought revivalist ministers from towns to farms,” she writes, before asking, “But, once they got there, why did anyone listen to them?”

(more…)

According to John McCain:

In the 21st century, nations don’t invade other nations.

Seriously. He said that without even a hint of irony. The mind truly boggles. And in related news, Ike Turner says you should be kind to your wife. Video below the fold.
(more…)

2081: Everyone Will Finally Be Equal. Trailer and more info at the site:

Based on the short story Harrison Bergeron by celebrated author Kurt Vonnegut, 2081 depicts a dystopian future in which, thanks to the 212th Amendment to the Constitution and the unceasing vigilance of the United States Handicapper General, everyone is finally equal… The strong wear weights, the beautiful wear masks and the intelligent wear earpieces that fire off loud noises to keep them from taking unfair advantage of their brains. It is a poetic tale of triumph and tragedy about a broken family, a brutal government, and an act of defiance that changes everything.

Featuring an original score performed by the world-renowned Kronos Quartet (Requiem for a Dream) and narration by Academy Award Nominee Patricia Clarkson (Far From Heaven, Goodnight and Good Luck), 2081 stars James Cosmo (Braveheart, Trainspotting, Narnia), Julie Hagerty (Airplane!, What About Bob?) and Armie Hammer (Justice League).

Via Caleb Brown.

– Jacob Grier