Friday, February 27, 2009

If it's Fair, Does That Make It Right?

So, the topic of unions has come up recently. I don't know about the rest of the country, but here in Iowa, union leadership is trying to push through bills including the idea of "fair share" in the workplace.

In Iowa, we have right to work laws, that state that in order to work, one needn't necessarily join a union or pay union dues, just because a union is present in a particular workplace. Union and non-union members alike work side by side. With Fair Share, if put into legislation, any worker in these particular workshops would be required to pay union dues (people hired before enactment of any such law would be grandfathered in, as this is limited to new hires) regardless of union membership.

Now, let me first say this. I am not against unions. I think they have their place in our society. They have done many good things in the past for workers (the 40 hr week, weekends off, etc), and still presently provide benefits to their members.

Where my argument against this idea of fair share lies is the limitation of my choices. If I'm a welder by trade (which I'm not, just an example), and I wish to go to work at a local foundry or whereever, and they have union representation in that particular shop, the union leadership is trying to say that I have to pay them, or go look elsewhere for employment. I've never met an employer that demands payment from me, for my work. It's always been that they pay me for my doing work so that they can make and distribute a product, or provide a service. But in order to participate in this hypothetical scenario, I now am required not only to pay about 20% or so of my earnings to the government in taxes, social security, and medicare/aid, but also now I'm throwing a percentage of my check at the union leadership. What all they do these days, depends on the local and the particular workplaces, I don't know the specifics. If the union leadership decides everything in our shop is hunky-dory over the span of my career, what exactly is my money funding?
In the end that's not even the point. The point is, I need money to support myself and more importantly my family, so that we have what we need to live. If I have the money by trading my time and efforts, and I have to use this money to pay for al these things, why should I also pay someone for the God-given right and responsibility to support my family?

Does my union membership somehow make me a better worker? Or for that matter, lack of membership suddenly decrease my talents and abilities on the job? I don't think so. I know some union workers who make my work activities look like kid's play, but I also know union workers who wouldn't work as hard as me, because they don't get paid enough to work that hard (despite making more than I do, which isnt hard to do), or "it's not their job" (I dont much care...if your forklift load lost a package off the pallet, pick the damn thing up if it isnt all that big or heavy).

Does union membership or lack thereof determine who I can trust in the workplace? Or suddenly preclude me from friendship with a memebr of the other side of the issue? No, because that's stupid. I'm a conservative, yet many of my closest friends and family are bleeding heart liberals, who agree on nothing with me politically. We don't say to each other, either take my side, or you're not a firend, or someone I can trust. I'm a devout gun guy, but those who don't care for guns, are fine by me. I also like to eat meat, a LOT. Do vegetarians offend me? Not really..although if you try to sneak in a tofu burger in place of my all beef patties, we might have ourselves a bit of a disagreement on the spot.

Anyways, my ADHD-like ways took over again...sorry. If I'm out looking for a job, and I'm offered an opportunity to work at a place, I'm going to take the job. If a union is present, undoubtedly a union rep will find me. I will listen to what he has to say and offer me. In the end, it should be my decision as to what I participate in, for exchanging my time and labor. If the employer is offering me one wage, and the union offers me better pay for the exact same position, I'll most likely go through the union rep. But in the end, I'd like the opportunity to sign my own deals. Either way I go, the rewards or consequences solely rest on my shoulders. My work choices shouldn't be mandated by the government, as these bill, if passed, would be a reality.

Pro-union people have pushed the "right to work" laws as "right to work for less". The way I see it, I have the right to work for whatever amount of money is within the limits of an employers ability to pay. Again, I'm not opposed to unions, but unions shouldn't be opposed to me making my choice of where i work, and for what amount of money.

Thursday, February 19, 2009

Beyond Acknowledging Problem to Creating Solutions

Now, I don't claim to have all the answers to the world's problems, as many of them are a lot more complicated than you'll ever get from any one opiner or news source anyways.

It seems to me, that many of society's problems are now tied so closely to politics anymore than ever before. This politician or that politician has THE answer to solving the world's problems. And then people take the finite number of ideas and pick a side, either based on their own values or depending on which political party they choose to follow wholeheartedly.

Now when it comes to politics, I don't follow the strict teachings of any one party. Inevitably members of all parties come up with some of the dumbest ideas on how to deal with things, but I suppose I don't have nearly enough time in my life to get to all that such a conversation might encompass before dying of boredom or a stress induced stroke or heart attack. I probably lean more republican than democrat, or rather I should say conservative as opposed to liberal, in my viewpoints. It's not that I don't get the liberal point of view as to what needs to be fixed, but I often question the liberal viewpoint in how to fix many of the identified problems.

The subject I intend to cover here today is the concepts of race and poverty. while poverty affects people regardless of race, it is often the minority groups that suffer the highest amount of poverty, percentage-wise. Now many people, wen it comes to political viewpoints seem to have pigeonholed themselves and each other into two different camps:

Republicans: Whether by self-design, or accusations, seem to be completely in the "pull yourself up by the bootstraps and do it yourself" camp. The whole idea of everyman for himself. They spit out the names of many people who had nothing and rose to wealth and power on their own merit, so why shouldn't we let the poor and minorities do the same?

Democrats: By the same parameters, democrats are all about we need to solve this problem by throwing everyone's money at it, haphazardly, and without regard to the will of the people. It also seems that many of those in poverty identify best with the democratic party. Is it because the democrats care about them, are them, or keep shoving money and benefits their way?

Both sides have their merits and their flaws.

My proposal is partially outlined at This is a secondary page for me, as I start to put ideas towards solutions out there. Granted its all raw ideas, but if you would go visit the page, leave me some comments there with your critiques, comments, or other ways to help develop the ideas before I put the plans into reality and action.

Essentially, I see the problems that exist in the form of race relations witht he overall human community, and I see the issues of poverty. Can I solve, or help to solve all the problems involved in these aspects? No, and I wouldn't claim to. But I do feel my ideas would be a good start on creating a starting point for solving some of the more technical aspects. The aspects of humanism involved with points of view are on the heads of each and every individual. All I can do is offer an outlet to solve the technical stuff, and with enough people behind the project, maybe, just maybe, we can sway some opinions as to what works and what doesn't.

The main idea is that we funnel money into the system to address issues of poverty in poor and minority neighborhoods. Unlike the democrat-based ideas, we use privately volunteered money only, and refuse government (taxpayer-funded) monies that seem to cncentrate on bureaucratic funding over solution based funding. Unlike the republican-based ideas, we help provide the support of those who have for those who don't, and involve ourselves in the solutions, instead of handing over some money and forgetting about it.

I propose to use the financial backing mostly from those who have it, along with some efforts fo those who care. And on the receiving end, lesser financial backing will occur, but I expect to see more of a concerted effort to re-build their communities, physically as well as socially. Through educational proposals at all levels, mentorship and activity programs, neighborhood beautification through the efforts of local residents, it is a wide-scope program I propose. With less money going into the administrative side of things, and more going toward fixing the problems directly.

It is no short-term solution by any means. I understand that once the program really starts working, we will still only be at the beginning stages, as on-going efforts will be needed to sustain any progress seen in the beginning. So before I lose my train of thought or any clear direction, please go visit my other page for Creative Community Renewal

Friday, February 13, 2009

Happy Mental Health Day to You!

Just some fluff for a Friday

The love story of Ralph and Edna...

Just because someone doesn't love you the way you want them to, doesn't mean they don't love you with all they have. Ralph and Edna were both patients in a mental hospital. One day while they were walking past the hospital swimming pool. Ralph suddenly jumped into the deep end.

He sank to the bottom of the pool and stayed there.

Edna promptly jumped in to save him. She swam to the bottom and pulled him out. When the Head Nurse Director became aware of Edna's heroic act she immediately ordered her to be discharged from the hospital, as she now considered her to be mentally stable.

When she went to tell Edna the news she said, 'Edna, I have good news and bad news. The good news is you're being discharged, since you were able to rationally respond to a crisis by jumping in and saving the life of the person you love. I have concluded that your act displays sound mindedness.

The bad news is, Ralph hung himself in the bathroom with his bathrobe belt right after you saved him. I am so sorry, but he's dead.'

Edna replied, 'He didn't hang himself, I put him there to dry. How soon can I go home?'

Happy Mental Health Day!

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Iowa Lawmakers Still Considering Smoking Ban Options

A majority of state representatives is supporting legislation to allow smoking in outdoor areas of bars and restaurants, but a House leader says efforts to alter Iowa’s smoking ban still have little chance to pass this year.

Smoking would be allowed in outdoor seating and serving areas of bars and restaurants under House File 211. Currently, those areas are almost entirely restricted.

Rep. McKinley Bailey, D-Webster City, who is leading the effort, said many lawmakers did not intend for the outdoor areas to have smoking prohibitions and that the health department overstepped its authority in the rule-making process.

But a health official noted the law specifically says smoking is prohibited in “outdoor seating or serving areas of restaurants.”

“That is the law. Even if we wanted to change it some way, we couldn’t,” said Bonnie Mapes of the state’s health department.

Twenty-three Democrats and 28 Republicans have signed onto the bill. The supporters include Speaker Pro Tem Polly Bukta, D-Clinton, and Assistant Minority Leader Jeff Kaufmann, R-Wilton.

Democratic leaders have said it is unlikely that changes would be made to last year’s smoking ban. The ban was narrowly passed last year and reopening debate could cause the ban to be reversed, they have said.

“We’re basically trying to fix what we believe the Department of Public Health messed up in the rules process last year,” Bailey said.

House File 211 also allows smoking in theatrical productions. The bill has not yet passed a subcommittee.

So far this year, at least four other smoking bills have been introduced, some that would add additional smoking restrictions, such as Senate File 57, that would ban smoking in gambling areas of casinos. Seventeen senators have signed their names as sponsors of that bill.

House Speaker Pat Murphy, D-Dubuque, said majority leaders in both the House and the Senate have discussed the smoking issue and agree that they have no plans to debate any of the bills this year.

“I still think it’s highly unlikely we would take up a bill that would not go anywhere in the Senate,” Murphy said. “We’re focusing on balancing the budget, dealing with disaster priorities, working with the federal government on a stimulus package and what we can do to create jobs to offset what’s going on in the economy.”

NOW..go back to the previously boldly highlighted statements. Is it just me, or does the health department's spokesperson not make any sense. Its a law and we cant change it? Wasn't it NOT a law before, but our lawMAKERS changed the game by making a law? Haven't many laws been changed, ammended, or overridden by new laws multiple times in our history?? Isn't that how they change things?

A Consensus On Government Intervention In Our Economy? Depends On Who You Talk To.

First there was TARP, the initial bailout plan. The government approved and distributed hundreds of billions of dollars, taxpayer monies either printed out of thin air or borrowed from other countries with a nice interest rate attached to our new and growing debt, piled onto an already enormous amount of debt that we seem so fond of building upon. As recent history has noted, we basically wasted that money on a whole lot of nothing. We stuck money into the hands of already rich people, who basically decided to hold onto the money for themselves. Instead of loosening the credit markets and rebooting the economy, we added a big pile of debt that we'll be paying on for decades, despite having seen any real benefit. So, government intervention is good? Not in this case, but chalk the government up for a score. Government: 1 The People: 0

Now we have TARP 2....the new stimulus package that is being hammered out into an agreeable plan between the House of Representatives and the Senate. The whole plan is being engineered by the same guys who engineered the first one. And like the first one, there is little to no accountability for any of the numbers. Who gets the money? How much do they get? What will these monies produce in the end? And to all three questions, I'll bet less than 1/10th of 1 percent of the populace in general, if not the same percentage of those voting on it, could give you a reliable answer. We're just set, regardless of public support, to start throwing money out at random ideas in hopes that something sticks and works. And while the government is supposed to work for us people, it is us people who are having the wool pulled over our eyes. The President has and does want this package passed as quickly as possible, with little to no debate, so that the money can start flowing into the hands of those the administration deems worthy. Now Our President and many "esteemed" members of congress, mainly democrats, are convinced that we as individuals, and businesses cannot solve our problems. Only the great and powerful U.S. Government, in all its inifinite wisdom (remember they already fleeced us for hundreds of billions once, and if your anti-war, Bush-hating people, the government was the ones behind confirming the intelligence and sending us to Iraq..pure geniuses on both counts, eh?), is the only entity capable of solving our problems. Nevermind the fact that some of our problems, economically speaking were forced on us, via government policy, as well as by example. How can the government tell us how to be fiscally responsible when they are in fact the greatest creators of debt and deficit the world has ever known. In fact, the majority of the major players involved in "solving our collective problems" were partly responsible for helping create some of these problems to begin with. Now maybe that last point can be a point of contention for some, but regardless of politics, it is those certain people of influence who helped shape policy in the past that got us to this point. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm a firm believer in the addage "You made the mess, clean it up", but spending outrageous amounts of money (especially on quite a few programs that do nothing for the economy other than throwing money around at nonproductive measures..uh, bike trails anyone? hellooooo?)
Many people voted President Obama into office, not over John McCain, but in response to George W Bush's 8 years of office. They called for the hope and change that Obama touted so greatly. And yet, here is Obama, doing the exact same things we tried under Bush, hiring the exact same people who have been running around Washington for years, some longer than Obama has even lived life on this planet. So, the change is nowhere to be seen, as of yet...other than the fact that our president has a different name than the one we had just a month ago. Oh wait, I'm mistaken..I just saw some loose change on the floor. As for the Hope issue...well here's to hoping we as a nation, or at least our powers that be, don't royally screw us up for an indefinite and unforeseeable future. I now plan to keep a jar of vaseline with me everytime I go to get my paycheck, because sooner or later the piper is going to want to be paid, and guess who he is gonna come to for the and me, that's who. All because our wonderful "leaders" in Washington have the most brilliant of ideas that always end up costing us money, while they attend their cocktail parties and laugh at the rest of us poor folks who think we really have any power to stick it to them. Because afterall, its the special interest guru who's tending bar that night, and he's mixing up their drinks real special....they just gave his cause a tax break plus a few hundren million bucks. Lucky us!
Below is a quote from President Barack Obama, made in January, followed by an open letter from some economists who have some slightly different ideas than he does.

"There is no disagreement that we need action by our government, a recovery plan that will help to jumpstart the economy."

With all due respect Mr. President, that is not true.
Notwithstanding reports that all economists are now Keynesians and that we all support a big increase in the burden of government, we do not believe that more government spending is a way to improve economic performance. More government spending by Hoover and Roosevelt did not pull the United States economy out of the Great Depression in the 1930s. More government spending did not solve Japan's "lost decade" in the 1990s. As such, it is a triumph of hope over experience to believe that more government spending will help the U.S. today. To improve the economy, policy makers should focus on reforms that remove impediments to work, saving, investment and production. Lower tax rates and a reduction in the burden of government are the best ways of using fiscal policy to boost growth.

Burton Abrams, Univ. of Delaware
Douglas Adie, Ohio University
Ryan Amacher, Univ. of Texas at Arlington
J.J. Arias, Georgia College & State University
Howard Baetjer, Jr., Towson University
Stacie Beck, Univ. of Delaware
Don Bellante, Univ. of South Florida
James Bennett, George Mason University
Bruce Benson, Florida State University
Sanjai Bhagat, Univ. of Colorado at Boulder
Mark Bils, Univ. of Rochester
Alberto Bisin, New York University
Walter Block, Loyola University New Orleans
Cecil Bohanon, Ball State University
Michele Boldrin, Washington University in St. Louis
Donald Booth, Chapman University
Michael Bordo, Rutgers University
Samuel Bostaph, Univ. of Dallas
Scott Bradford, Brigham Young University
Genevieve Briand, Eastern Washington University
George Brower, Moravian College
James Buchanan, Nobel laureate
Richard Burdekin, Claremont McKenna College
Henry Butler, Northwestern University
William Butos, Trinity College
Peter Calcagno, College of Charleston
Bryan Caplan, George Mason University
Art Carden, Rhodes College
James Cardon, Brigham Young University
Dustin Chambers, Salisbury University
Emily Chamlee-Wright, Beloit College
V.V. Chari, Univ. of Minnesota
Barry Chiswick, Univ. of Illinois at Chicago
Lawrence Cima, John Carroll University
J.R. Clark, Univ. of Tennessee at Chattanooga
Gian Luca Clementi, New York University
R. Morris Coats, Nicholls State University
John Cochran, Metropolitan State College
John Cochrane, Univ. of Chicago
John Cogan, Hoover Institution, Stanford University
John Coleman, Duke University
Boyd Collier, Tarleton State University
Robert Collinge, Univ. of Texas at San Antonio
Lee Coppock, Univ. of Virginia
Mario Crucini, Vanderbilt University
Christopher Culp, Univ. of Chicago
Kirby Cundiff, Northeastern State University
Antony Davies, Duquesne University
John Dawson, Appalachian State University
Clarence Deitsch, Ball State University
Arthur Diamond, Jr., Univ. of Nebraska at Omaha
John Dobra, Univ. of Nevada, Reno
James Dorn, Towson University
Christopher Douglas, Univ. of Michigan, Flint
Floyd Duncan, Virginia Military Institute
Francis Egan, Trinity College
John Egger, Towson University
Kenneth Elzinga, Univ. of Virginia
Paul Evans, Ohio State University
Eugene Fama, Univ. of Chicago
W. Ken Farr, Georgia College & State University
Hartmut Fischer, Univ. of San Francisco
Fred Foldvary, Santa Clara University
Murray Frank, Univ. of Minnesota
Peter Frank, Wingate University
Timothy Fuerst, Bowling Green State University
B. Delworth Gardner, Brigham Young University
John Garen, Univ. of Kentucky
Rick Geddes, Cornell University
Aaron Gellman, Northwestern University
William Gerdes, Clarke College
Michael Gibbs, Univ. of Chicago
Stephan Gohmann, Univ. of Louisville
Rodolfo Gonzalez, San Jose State University
Richard Gordon, Penn State University
Peter Gordon, Univ. of Southern California
Ernie Goss, Creighton University
Paul Gregory, Univ. of Houston
Earl Grinols, Baylor University
Daniel Gropper, Auburn University
R.W. Hafer, Southern Illinois
University, Edwardsville
Arthur Hall, Univ. of Kansas
Steve Hanke, Johns Hopkins
Stephen Happel, Arizona State University
Frank Hefner, College of Charleston
Ronald Heiner, George Mason University
David Henderson, Hoover Institution, Stanford University
Robert Herren, North Dakota State University
Gailen Hite, Columbia University
Steven Horwitz, St. Lawrence University
John Howe, Univ. of Missouri, Columbia
Jeffrey Hummel, San Jose State University
Bruce Hutchinson, Univ. of Tennessee at Chattanooga
Brian Jacobsen, Wisconsin Lutheran College
Jason Johnston, Univ. of Pennsylvania
Boyan Jovanovic, New York University
Jonathan Karpoff, Univ. of Washington
Barry Keating, Univ. of Notre Dame
Naveen Khanna, Michigan State University
Nicholas Kiefer, Cornell University
Daniel Klein, George Mason University
Paul Koch, Univ. of Kansas
Narayana Kocherlakota, Univ. of Minnesota
Marek Kolar, Delta College
Roger Koppl, Fairleigh Dickinson University
Kishore Kulkarni, Metropolitan State College of Denver
Deepak Lal, UCLA
George Langelett, South Dakota State University
James Larriviere, Spring Hill College
Robert Lawson, Auburn University
John Levendis, Loyola University New Orleans
David Levine, Washington University in St. Louis
Peter Lewin, Univ. of Texas at Dallas
Dean Lillard, Cornell University
Zheng Liu, Emory University
Alan Lockard, Binghampton University
Edward Lopez, San Jose State University
John Lunn, Hope College
Glenn MacDonald, Washington
University in St. Louis
Michael Marlow, California
Polytechnic State University
Deryl Martin, Tennessee Tech University
Dale Matcheck, Northwood University
Deirdre McCloskey, Univ. of Illinois, Chicago
John McDermott, Univ. of South Carolina
Joseph McGarrity, Univ. of Central Arkansas
Roger Meiners, Univ. of Texas at Arlington
Allan Meltzer, Carnegie Mellon University
John Merrifield, Univ. of Texas at San Antonio
James Miller III, George Mason University
Jeffrey Miron, Harvard University
Thomas Moeller, Texas Christian University
John Moorhouse, Wake Forest University
Andrea Moro, Vanderbilt University
Andrew Morriss, Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Michael Munger, Duke University
Kevin Murphy, Univ. of Southern California
Richard Muth, Emory University
Charles Nelson, Univ. of Washington
Seth Norton, Wheaton College
Lee Ohanian, Univ. of California, Los Angeles
Lydia Ortega, San Jose State University
Evan Osborne, Wright State University
Randall Parker, East Carolina University
Donald Parsons, George Washington University
Sam Peltzman, Univ. of Chicago
Mark Perry, Univ. of Michigan, Flint
Christopher Phelan, Univ. of Minnesota
Gordon Phillips, Univ. of Maryland
Michael Pippenger, Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks
Tomasz Piskorski, Columbia University
Brennan Platt, Brigham Young University
Joseph Pomykala, Towson University
William Poole, Univ. of Delaware
Barry Poulson, Univ. of Colorado at Boulder
Benjamin Powell, Suffolk University
Edward Prescott, Nobel laureate
Gary Quinlivan, Saint Vincent College
Reza Ramazani, Saint Michael's College
Adriano Rampini, Duke University
Eric Rasmusen, Indiana University
Mario Rizzo, New York University
Richard Roll, Univ. of California, Los Angeles
Robert Rossana, Wayne State University
James Roumasset, Univ. of Hawaii at Manoa
John Rowe, Univ. of South Florida
Charles Rowley, George Mason University
Juan Rubio-Ramirez, Duke University
Roy Ruffin, Univ. of Houston
Kevin Salyer, Univ. of California, Davis
Pavel Savor, Univ. of Pennsylvania
Ronald Schmidt, Univ. of Rochester
Carlos Seiglie, Rutgers University
William Shughart II, Univ. of Mississippi
Charles Skipton, Univ. of Tampa
James Smith, Western Carolina University
Vernon Smith, Nobel laureate
Lawrence Southwick, Jr., Univ. at Buffalo
Dean Stansel, Florida Gulf Coast University
Houston Stokes, Univ. of Illinois at Chicago
Brian Strow, Western Kentucky University
Shirley Svorny, California State
University, Northridge
John Tatom, Indiana State University
Wade Thomas, State University of New York at Oneonta
Henry Thompson, Auburn University
Alex Tokarev, The King's College
Edward Tower, Duke University
Leo Troy, Rutgers University
David Tuerck, Suffolk University
Charlotte Twight, Boise State University
Kamal Upadhyaya, Univ. of New Haven
Charles Upton, Kent State University
T. Norman Van Cott, Ball State University
Richard Vedder, Ohio University
Richard Wagner, George Mason University
Douglas M. Walker, College of Charleston
Douglas O. Walker, Regent University
Christopher Westley, Jacksonville State University
Lawrence White, Univ. of Missouri at St. Louis
Walter Williams, George Mason University
Doug Wills, Univ. of Washington Tacoma
Dennis Wilson, Western Kentucky University
Gary Wolfram, Hillsdale College
Huizhong Zhou, Western Michigan University
Additional economists who have signed the statement

Lee Adkins, Oklahoma State University
William Albrecht, Univ. of Iowa
Donald Alexander, Western Michigan University
Geoffrey Andron, Austin Community College
Nathan Ashby, Univ. of Texas at El Paso
George Averitt, Purdue North Central University
Charles Baird, California State University, East Bay
Timothy Bastian, Creighton University
John Bethune, Barton College
Robert Bise, Orange Coast College
Karl Borden, University of Nebraska
Donald Boudreaux, George Mason University
Ivan Brick, Rutgers University
Phil Bryson, Brigham Young University
Richard Burkhauser, Cornell University
Edwin Burton, Univ. of Virginia
Jim Butkiewicz, Univ. of Delaware
Richard Cebula, Armstrong Atlantic State University
Don Chance, Louisiana State University
Robert Chatfield, Univ. of Nevada, Las Vegas
Lloyd Cohen, George Mason University
Peter Colwell, Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Michael Connolly, Univ. of Miami
Jim Couch, Univ. of North Alabama
Eleanor Craig, Univ. of Delaware
Michael Daniels, Columbus State University
A. Edward Day, Univ. of Texas at Dallas
Stephen Dempsey, Univ. of Vermont
Allan DeSerpa, Arizona State University
William Dewald, Ohio State University
Jeff Dorfman, Univ. of Georgia
Lanny Ebenstein, Univ. of California, Santa Barbara
Michael Erickson, The College of Idaho
Jack Estill, San Jose State University
Dorla Evans, Univ. of Alabama in Huntsville
Frank Falero, California State University, Bakersfield
Daniel Feenberg, National Bureau of Economic Research
Eric Fisher, California Polytechnic State University
Arthur Fleisher, Metropolitan State College of Denver
William Ford, Middle Tennessee State University
Ralph Frasca, Univ. of Dayton
Joseph Giacalone, St. John's University
Adam Gifford, California State Unviersity, Northridge
Otis Gilley, Louisiana Tech University
J. Edward Graham, University of North Carolina at Wilmington
Richard Grant, Lipscomb University
Gauri-Shankar Guha, Arkansas State University
Darren Gulla, Univ. of Kentucky
Dennis Halcoussis, California State University, Northridge
Richard Hart, Miami University
James Hartley, Mount Holyoke College
Thomas Hazlett, George Mason University
Scott Hein, Texas Tech University
Bradley Hobbs, Florida Gulf Coast University
John Hoehn, Michigan State University
Daniel Houser, George Mason University
Thomas Howard, University of Denver
Chris Hughen, Univ. of Denver
Marcus Ingram, Univ. of Tampa
Joseph Jadlow, Oklahoma State University
Sherry Jarrell, Wake Forest University
Carrie Kerekes, Florida Gulf Coast University
Robert Krol, California State University, Northridge
James Kurre, Penn State Erie
Tom Lehman, Indiana Wesleyan University
W. Cris Lewis, Utah State University
Stan Liebowitz, Univ. of Texas at Dallas
Anthony Losasso, Univ. of Illinois at Chicago
John Lott, Jr., Univ. of Maryland
Keith Malone, Univ. of North Alabama
Henry Manne, George Mason University
Richard Marcus, Univ. of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Timothy Mathews, Kennesaw State University
John Matsusaka, Univ. of Southern California
Thomas Mayor, Univ. of Houston
W. Douglas McMillin, Louisiana State University
Mario Miranda, The Ohio State University
Ed Miseta, Penn State Erie
James Moncur, Univ. of Hawaii at Manoa
Charles Moss, Univ. of Florida
Tim Muris, George Mason University
John Murray, Univ. of Toledo
David Mustard, Univ. of Georgia
Steven Myers, Univ. of Akron
Dhananjay Nanda, University of Miami
Stephen Parente, Univ. of Minnesota
Allen Parkman, Univ. of New Mexico
Douglas Patterson, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and University
Timothy Perri, Appalachian State University
Mark Pingle, Univ. of Nevada, Reno
Ivan Pongracic, Hillsdale College
Robert Prati, East Carolina University
Richard Rawlins, Missouri Southern State University
Thomas Rhee, California State University, Long Beach
Christine Ries, Georgia Institute of Technology
Nancy Roberts, Arizona State University
Larry Ross, Univ. of Alaska Anchorage
Timothy Roth, Univ. of Texas at El Paso
Atulya Sarin, Santa Clara University
Thomas Saving, Texas A&M University
Eric Schansberg, Indiana University Southeast
John Seater, North Carolina University
Alan Shapiro, Univ. of Southern California
Thomas Simmons, Greenfield Community College
Frank Spreng, McKendree University
Judith Staley Brenneke, John Carroll University
John E. Stapleford, Eastern University
Courtenay Stone, Ball State University
Avanidhar Subrahmanyam, UCLA
Scott Sumner, Bentley University
Clifford Thies, Shenandoah University
William Trumbull, West Virginia University
A. Sinan Unur, Cornell University
Randall Valentine, Georgia Southwestern State University
Gustavo Ventura, Univ. of Iowa
Marc Weidenmier, Claremont McKenna College
Robert Whaples, Wake Forest University
Gene Wunder, Washburn University
John Zdanowicz, Florida International University
Jerry Zimmerman, Univ. of Rochester
Joseph Zoric, Franciscan University of Steubenville