RSS FEEDSRecent Research
March 9, 2010 | Commentary by MATTHEW BROUILLETTE
For Whom The Turnpike Tolls
Tolls are appropriate because they are imposed directly upon travelers for their use of roads. However, the plan to toll I-80 represents more than a toll. It is also a tax on drivers because more than $160 million in toll dollars from the highway will be funneled to mass transit systems, primarily in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. Taxing drivers in the northern tier to subsidize mass transit users in the southeast and southwest is bad public policy.
March 8, 2010 | Commentary by MATTHEW BROUILLETTE
Rendell’s War on (Some) Special Interests
Gov. Rendell, of course, didn't declare war on all special interests - only those who oppose his tax-borrow-and-spend agenda. For example, while he lambasts the natural gas industry for opposing yet another tax upon the several it already pays, he gives a pass to the special interests clamoring for more of its money.
January 19, 2010 | Commentary by MATTHEW BROUILLETTE
Mann-Made Global Warming?
Climategate was born in late November 2009 with the release of more than a thousand emails and other documents from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in England. One of the prominent figures in these emails is Penn State's Michael Mann, a professor in the university's Department of Meteorology.
To Penn State's credit, the university announced it would investigate Mann's alleged misconduct. But the school has a serious conflict of interest that legitimately calls into question its ability to conduct a thorough and unbiased investigation.
Recent Blog Posts
FEBRUARY 16, 2010
There PennFuture Goes Again!
This morning on Harrisburg's NPR station WITF (audio), Commonwealth Foundation adjunct scholar Andrew Langer debated Jan Jarrett of PennFuture. Afterward Jarrett slammed us in a press release because of our call for an independent investigation of Penn State Climategate scientist Michael Mann. Here's my email reply to Ms. Jarrett.
Jan,
Once again you have attacked the Commonwealth Foundation while ignoring the facts and refusing to debate them.
For example, you state that "the foundation has produced no evidence to document that conclusion [the Penn State's investigation was a whitewash]". To the contrary, we specifically identified areas in which Penn State failed to investigate and showed where their findings were directly contradicted by the evidence.
You go on to claim that the "Commonwealth Foundation is entitled to ignore accepted science and form its own opinion." You know this is a lie, and that we are very willing to engage in debate on the science. In fact, I renew my challenge to you to co-host a debate at Penn State on the science. You never responded to my challenge below. So who is really hiding behind opinions when you're afraid to engage in a scientific debate?
What is truly amazing to me is that PennFuture continues to deny any scientific misconduct by global warming apologists, despite a myriad of evidence in the contrary. I guess now the Washington Post must be a "right-wing global warming denier" for pointing out the flawed science you peddle. Indeed, if anyone is attempting to "twist climate change science to meet its ideological bent" (as well as efforts to secure taxpayer-funded grants), it is PennFuture.
So c'mon, Jan, put your money where your mouth is! Let's get Dr. Michael Mann to debate Dr. Pat Michaels at Beaver Stadium!
I look forward to your response!
Stay warm!
Matt
-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Brouillette
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 9:16 PM
To: Jan Jarrett
Cc: Lisa Powers
Subject: A Global Warming DebateJan:
Let's have a debate!
You pick your two best global warming apologists and I'll pick my best two "deniers" (as you so fondly call us), and CF will co-host a debate with PennFuture at Penn State. We'll pick an agreeable moderator or co-moderators who will ask our questions of opposing sides. You up for it?
I know it's not as fun as saying absurd things like, "In their universe, hot is cold," but I thought you might possibly be interested in elevating the discussion.
Please note that I've copied Lisa Powers, Penn State's Public Information Director, who I'm sure will help out with the debate logistics given the university's commitment to seeking the truth on the pressing matters of our day.
Also, I've blind copied a number of members of the media, and a few others, who I think would be interested in covering such an event if you are willing.
I'll eagerly await your response as I dig out from these 18 inches of global warming this weekend.
Cheers!
Matt
posted by MATTHEW BROUILLETTE | 05:08 PM | 0 comment
FEBRUARY 15, 2010
Do as We Say, Not as We Do
Public sector unions argue that "defined-benefit" pension plans are necessary to attract and retain good government workers. They also argue that we must pay people equitably -- i.e., we can't pay teachers for performance or reward some workers based on merit -- and that work rules must be adhered to -- i.e., everyone must work the same hours.
So I thought it was rather ironic that organized labor's "think tank" (Keystone Research Center/Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center) posted an employment position on Harrisburg's Patriot-News classifieds that runs contrary to everything they tell everyone else they should do:
OFFICE MANAGER
Keystone Research Center, a 10-person, Harrisburg-based progressive think tank, seeks an Office Manager to perform administrative, financial, and human resources duties, including billing and invoicing, coordination with accountant, board management, general administrative duties., and event planning duties as time allows. Substantial experience and facility with Word, Excel, and database software required; associate's degree preferred.Occasional late or weekend hours. Competitive salary based on experience, plus family medical benefits and 401-K type pension.[emphasis added]
Please send a letter of interest and résumé to jobs@keystoneresearch.org or fax to 717-255-7193.
Hmmm, sounds too much like the evil private sector to me.
posted by MATTHEW BROUILLETTE | 02:52 PM | 0 comment
FEBRUARY 13, 2010
Rendell's Taxpayer Snow Job: No-Work Pay-Day
The Patriot-News reported that when Gov. Rendell closed down state government for the recent snow storm, state workers would receive full pay for not working -- costing the taxpayers upwards of $8 million!
My comment, believe it or not, sparked a bit of controversy. Of course, a two sentence response cannot fully explain my position, so I've sent the following letter to the editor:
I would like to explain my criticism of Gov. Rendell for granting a work-free pay day for state government employees during the recent snow storm.
I understand and agree with Gov. Rendell's decision to close state government due to the 18-inches of global warming on our roads. Keeping our highways free of state workers made them easier to clean so those in the private sector could get to work to keep paying their taxes.
Where the governor erred was in giving the taxpayers the $8 million bill for paying people not to work. While most private sector employees -- and even other local government employees -- were forced to take a personal or vacation day (or simply didn’t get paid) Rendell decided to give a freebie. The work of state government didn’t cease because of snow -- permits still need approval, payments need to be processed, and so forth -- nor did taxpayers get a day off from paying taxes.
The appropriate response would have been to require this no-work pay-day to be made up to the taxpayers. Gov. Rendell should have announced that state employees would need to report to work on President's Day -- or any one of the paid holidays they receive that don't exist in the private sector.
This would have been fair to both state workers and the taxpayers of Pennsylvania.
posted by MATTHEW BROUILLETTE | 11:20 AM | 5 comments
