Commentary on proposed legislation that would take more money out of New Mexico's Land Grant Permanent Fund, by NMBC follower David C. Williams, Ph. D.
In considering the wisdom of the proposed increased withdrawal rates from the Permanent Fund, it would be wise to remember that increasing the withdrawal rate from 5% to 6% will reduce the rate of growth (or increase the rate of decline) of the Fund, with the effect on the magnitude of the Fund being cumulative as time passes. The time will therefore come (which I call the "cross-over time") when a withdrawal of 6% will yield no more than would have a withdrawal of 5% if the rate had been left at that value; after the cross-over time, the fund with a continuing 6% withdrawal would still be yielding less than it would have with a 5% withdrawal if the rate had been left at that value. If we neglect for the moment the effect of continuing inflows to the Fund from various royalties, a little math shows that the cross-over time is about 18 years (18.23 years, in my simplified model). After that, the 6% withdrawal rate would be yielding less than would have been yielded by leaving the rate at 5%.
Commentary By Carla J. Sonntag
President and Founder, New Mexico Business Coalition
It’s admirable to see how hard our legislators are working. Whether I agree with them or not, they are focused on moving their agendas.
The question is whether or not those agendas are best for our state.
Taking away our rights: The House passed HB 85 Union Security Agreements along party lines with Democrats supporting and Republicans opposing over the weekend. The bill, if signed into law, would stop additional counties from passing Right to Work (RTW) ordinances. It also retroactively takes away the rights of the workers who work in 10 NM counties or the Village of Ruidoso that passed RTW ordinances. Incredibly the bill states in Section 1 B that ‘any employer or labor organization may execute and apply an agreement REQUIRING membership in a labor organization AS A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT.’
Recently the Albuquerque Public Schools (APS) had a $900 million mill levy and bond package defeated. Voters were clear they love our kids and respect our teachers. They do not, however, feel APS has been a good steward of their tax money.
We hoped that APS understood that message, but we don’t see evidence they do.
New Mexico is a state currently dependent on oil and gas production. YES, we are dependent on this industry that provides a minimum of one-third of our state’s budget. Imagine life without that industry . . . where would we find the money for education and so many other things?
Fact is, right now, we would be in a world of hurt. If you have doubts, look at this report that the oil and gas industry just released.
With some elected officials who identify as ‘progressive’ attacking that industry at every turn, it begs the question, “What are they thinking?” While well intentioned to protect our environment and bring in more money for schools, these views translate into big problems for our state that seem to be counterproductive to their desired results. Want to see how?
The 2019 Legislative Session has been packed with action so far. Here’s a collection of thoughts, information and updates on various topics:
A study by Washington University on minimum wage was very enlightening. From an employer’s perspective, each $1/hour increase in minimum wage costs the employer approximately $2,600/year per employee. So if New Mexico’s statewide minimum wage increases from $7.50 to $10, it will cost employers $6,500/year per employee in those brackets.
There have been lots of attempts to raid the State Land Grant Permanent Fund and that's nothing new. You can read more about this ongoing issue here and here.