Mercatus Policy Download

With the Super Bowl behind us, football fans are already looking ahead to the 2020 season, and they’re not the only ones thinking about the future of the NFL. More specifically, speculation about where and how new stadiums will be built is in full swing, particularly in the Washington, DC area. Even back in December, the Washington Post reported that Washington Redskins owner Daniel Snyder was working with Congress to secure a deal for a new football stadium, and in response, local lawmakers have started signaling their reluctance to engage in a bidding war for the team. Virginia Delegate Michael Webert introduced legislation proposing an “interstate compact” between Virginia, Maryland, and DC, which would essentially bar all three localities from providing incentives to host a new Redskins stadium. Maryland Delegate David Moon and DC Councilmember David Grosso have both indicated support for something similar. So today, we’re talking about the Redskins stadium, how an interstate compact might affect it, and

What comes to mind when you hear the word “drones?” For some, the answer might be a remotely-piloted military aircraft. For others, it might be the little quad-copter you fly around your backyard for fun. But for our guests today, drones might be the future of healthcare. Other countries have already started experimenting with drone technology in order to deliver medication, blood, or other supplies, and the technology could one day replace or augment some ambulances or emergency helicopters, making such services more accessible, affordable, and safer. But we aren’t there yet, and here to talk about what it might take to get us there are two healthcare policy experts who just co-authored an essay for STAT entitled “Drones Delivering Medical Supplies and More Can Help Save American Lives.” Dr. Darcy Nikol Bryan, an associate clinical professor at the University of California, and a practicing physician at the Riverside Medical Clinic. Also relevant to today’s discussion, she is a certified remote pilot Rober

Even in the middle of a partial federal government shutdown, federal, state, and local agencies continue to play a huge role in the policy world and our everyday lives. Regulations help determine everything from the kind of toothpaste you used this morning to the music you listened to on the radio during your commute to rent prices in your neighborhood, and after an exciting year of regulatory policy in 2018, we're eager to hear more about how the regulatory landscape may change in the year ahead. Here to help walk us through that and to make some predictions about what we might expect from policymakers, we're joined by three terrific guests: Cheryl Bolen, reporter on the White House for Bloomberg BNA, and is well-known as one of the top regulatory journalists in the country Emily Hamilton, economist here at Mercatus focusing on urban economics and land-use policy James Broughel, economist with Mercatus and a law professor specializing in state and federal regulatory procedures   Check out mercatus.org and

There are a lot of ways we could wrap up the year, but probably none better than to take a step back, look at 2018, and ask ourselves what the most important economic developments were. From trade wars to interest rate hikes, inverting yield curves to tax reform implementation, a lot happened this year. We've asked our guests today to be prepared to talk about…well, just about everything. We actually want to start with a disclaimer that we normally wouldn’t include, and it’s that we are recording this podcast in mid-December just before the Federal Reserve’s December press conference. Since we’re probably going to get to monetary policy and interest rates and all that, we mention that in case Fed Chair Jay Powell does something shocking or surprising and throws everything we’re about to talk about out the window. With that out of the way, we're very happy to welcome some incredible guests to the show today: From the Washington Post, we’re joined by economics correspondent Heather Long. Heather is a consiste

To kick off the year, MIT’s Technology Review did something they’ve done every year since 2001: they picked “10 Breakthrough Technologies” to watch in the coming years. Those breakthroughs varied from 3D metal printing to artificial embryos to ubiquitous and affordable artificial intelligence and everything in between. We’re not going to go through the list and rank how those predictions turned out, but we are going to bring on our own technology policy experts to get their take on the biggest tech developments of 2018, why they matter, and what to watch for in 2019. Here to wax nostalgic about 2018 and peer into the future of 2019 we have a couple of experts in tech policy: We’re joined on the phone by Roslyn Layton, visiting scholar with the American Enterprise Institute Jennifer Huddleston, research fellow here at Mercatus Check out mercatus.org and The Bridge for our latest research, publications, and podcast episodes. Love the show? Give us a rating on Apple Podcasts! Follow Chad on Twitter @ChadMReese

***Stick around until the end of the show to hear our latest What's on Tap segment and what beer we're drinking today! Check out the Twenty Three Anniversary beer by Avery Brewing Co. in Boulder, Colorado here.*** The last time we talked about trade was back in April, right about the time China had started to threaten new taxes on imported American products. That, of course, was a response to our own new taxes imposed on imported steel and aluminum. A lot has happened since April, including a planned replacement for the North American Free Trade Agreement, and a new Democratic majority in the House of Representatives may change the trajectory of trade policy even further. Here to help us unpack the current state of trade policy in the US and abroad, and maybe even make some predictions about where it could be headed in the future, we're pleased to welcome our two experts:  Dan Griswold is the co-director of the Mercatus Center's trade and immigration portfolio, author of the book Mad About Trade: Why Main S

The policy world loves to talk about infrastructure. Support for infrastructure policy is often bipartisan, and it’s almost assumed now that candidates running for office will use the phrase “crumbling roads and bridges” at some point during their campaigns. But there’s another side to infrastructure that might be more interesting than those roads, bridges, and airports, and that’s the infrastructure innovation that often happens at the state and local level. Given promising new technologies like dockless scooters or bicycles and driverless cars, it’s easy to forget that ride-sharing apps like Uber and Lyft are still relatively new parts of how people get around. So today, we have three experts to talk about this new world of infrastructure needs, sometimes called “Transportation 3.0.” Specifically, we’re going to be talking about how state and local policy interacts with these new issues: Alex Baca, Engagement Director for the Coalition for Smarter Growth, where she works to promote walkable, inclusive, and

Today we have a special, behind the scenes episode for you. Earlier in September, the Atlas Network announced the finalists for the 2018 Templeton Freedom Award, and the Mercatus Center was fortunate enough to be on that list. Specifically, Atlas identified the RegData project and the way states have used the project to reform regulations. Since there’s a lot to unpack in that one sentence, Chad's joined by some Mercatus colleagues who have been instrumental in the project from day one to help explain what, exactly, RegData is, why it’s important, and how state governments can take advantage of the research we’ve done to make meaningful policy changes: Patrick McLaughlin, director of the Program for Economic Research on Regulation, and the creator of RegData James Broughel, state and local policy research fellow here at Mercatus, and an adjunct law professor at the Antonin Scalia Law School Kate De Lanoy, What’s on Tap co-host and director of our media relations team Love the show? Give us a rating on Apple

After more than a year of debating federal tax cuts, a return to trillion dollar deficits, and the fiscal condition of the federal government, you might think there’s not much more to say about fiscal solvency in the US. Of course, for those who follow state policy issues, there is still plenty to discuss spread out among 50 state government budgets. In fact, the Mercatus Center just released its fifth and final study of the fiscal condition of all 50 states. The study ranks each state according to fiscal health and discusses trends from a decade’s worth of data. Here to dive into that data, what it means for states, and what a path forward might look like are the study’s authors: Eileen Norcross, Vice President of Policy Research here at Mercatus, and an expert on state policy issues. Co-author, Olivia Gonzalez is a Research Associate at Mercatus, and is the author of an ongoing series of articles diving into some of the interesting stories she discovered while conducting this research. Click here to learn

A little over a year and a half ago, President Trump issued his 7th Executive Order. Titled “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,” Executive Order 13771 is better known in regulatory policy circles as the “1-in-2-out” rule. The general idea is that if you have too many regulations, one way to fix the problem is by requiring that regulatory agencies eliminate 2 rules for each new one they implement. Longtime listeners will recall back in May when we discussed the issue briefly, but now that we’ve had a little more time to see the rule in action, we thought the time was right to revisit the issue to see what was working, and where there might be room for improvement in the regulatory reform process. To do that, we’re lucky enough to have Laura Jones back on the show. Laura is a visiting research fellow at Mercatus, and the executive vice president and chief strategic officer of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. We also have James Broughel in studio. James is a research fellow her

Over the past two years, Illinois has taken multiple steps to reform how it regulates occupational and professional licenses. Illinois’ reform efforts are part of a broader national movement reexamining the ways in which we license certain professions. In other words, how state governments decide who’s allowed to work in what jobs. Here to do that, we have the perfect panel for today’s topic: Secretary Bryan Schneider from the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation From the same Department, we’re also joined by the Director of the Professional Regulation Division, Jessica Baer Matt Mitchell, who directs our research program on government granted privilege here at Mercatus   Want to get your hands on a signed copy of Tyler Cowen's new book Stubborn Attachments before it hits bookstores on October 16th? Rate and review your favorite Mercatus podcast, including the Mercatus Policy Download, Conversations with Tyler, the Hayek Program Podcast, or Macro Musings on Apple Podcasts and you

Last month, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady released what he’s calling a “listening session framework” for a second bite at the tax reform apple. While many thought that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act passed last December would be the last we’d hear about tax reform for at least a few years, Brady’s framework gives us the outline for what’s been dubbed “Tax Reform 2.0.” The plan includes permanent tax cuts, new savings vehicles for families, retirees, and students, and reforms aimed at removing, quote, “barriers to growth.” Since this comes right in the midst of ongoing fallout from Tax Reform 1.0, specifically states adjusting to changes to state and local deductions, it’s the perfect time to pause and reflect on where tax policy is now, and what it might look like if 2.0 becomes a reality. Here to talk about all things tax, we’ve got an all-star panel lined-up: Bernie Becker, tax reporter for Politico, known to many of you as the brains behind the “Morning Tax” tipsheet Veronique de Rugy, se

For most of us, terms like “3, 4, and 5G” may not mean much more than an indicator that we can use our smartphones, or that it’s time to upgrade them to a newer model. They are simply markers of each new generation in wireless technology. But for telecommunications policy experts, 5G really matters. Some have predicted that exciting new technologies like driverless cars can only become a reality with the speed and reliability that 5G will provide. Futuristic smart-homes that rely on a variety of different internet-connected devices may need the flexibility that 5G offers, and Virtual Reality may only be convincing in a 5G world. But if 5G is really that different from 4G, it’s fair to ask if we’re prepared for the change. Today, we’re going to talk about what needs to happen, particularly in the policymaking world, in order to capture the full benefits of the next generation of telecommunications technology. Here to do that, we're joined by two guests: Federal Communications Commissioner Michael O’Rielly, pr

Sports are often a great unifier for society. They give us arbitrary, even petty rivalries that we can lean into without taking too seriously at the same time that they bring people together. But sports, particularly at the professional level, can be expensive. Even ignoring things like player salaries, equipment, and an extensive staff, every sports team needs a place to call home, and stadium costs can easily run in the hundreds of millions of dollars. That’s not really something most folks worry about as long as wealthy sports team owners are paying for their own stadiums, but city and state governments increasingly view stadium construction as a form of economic stimulus. As a result, there’s a strong temptation to funnel public funds towards these projects, either in the form of direct subsidies, or by giving teams a tax break. Here to talk about how all of this works, including the pros and cons of this kind of development strategy, we have some guests who have spent a lot of time following the issue:

“How many people are unemployed” sounds like a simple question with a straightforward answer: just go around and find out how many people don’t have jobs and you’re done! However, as economists who study the issue will tell you, it’s not that easy. The Bureau of Labor Statistics, a government agency charged with collecting data, has six separate measures of unemployment. And just in case you think we’re splitting hairs, those different measures ranged from as low as 1.7 to as high as 8.5% last year. Since the way unemployment is measured and talked about can influence stock prices, elections, and how people generally feel about the economy on a day to day basis, it’s important to understand what these different numbers mean. Luckily, we’re joined by some folks who spend their time thinking about this stuff so you don’t have to: Eric Morath, labor economics and policy reporter for the Wall Street Journal Michael Farren, economist with the Mercatus Center who specializes in labor, economic development, and tra

Today we have a special bonus episode for you, giving you a look inside the Mercatus Center’s newest project. Those of you who have followed our work over the past year or so may have noticed an increased attention to the idea of policy moonshots: high-risk, high-reward efforts aimed at dramatically improving the world. Today, we’re taking our own advice. This fall, the Mercatus Center will launch “Emergent Ventures,” an incubator designed to fund and support dynamic and promising ideas with the potential to improve society. To talk more about Emergent Ventures, we have a special guest, Tyler Cowen. Tyler is the General Director of the Mercatus Center, and the Holbert Harris Chair of Economics at George Mason University. He is the coauthor of the popular economics blog Marginal Revolution, cofounder of the online educational platform Marginal Revolution University, and host of the podcast Conversations with Tyler. To learn more about the project, check out Emergent Ventures. Follow Chad on Twitter @ChadMReese

How to regulate consumer financial products and services has remained one of the most contentious issues in Washington since the financial crisis. Congress created a new agency aimed at dealing with the issue in the wake of the crisis, but nearly 7 years after that agency first opened its doors, the issue remains as relevant as ever. In fact, experts are even divided on what to call the agency. For some, it’s the “Consumer Financial Protection Bureau,” or CFPB. For others, including Acting Director Mick Mulvaney, it’s the “Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection,” or the BCFP. Today, we're going to try and just call it “The Bureau,” and ask our guests to talk a little about the recent nomination of Kathleen Kraninger to direct the agency. More importantly, however, we’ll talk about the future of consumer credit regulation regardless of who runs the Bureau, or what it’s called: Justin Schardin, a fellow with the Bipartisan Policy Center, and the former director of their Financial Regulatory Reform Initiative.

Everyone seems to agree that America is a nation of immigrants. Beyond that, however, actual immigration policy remains a contentious and often partisan topic. From insistence on a border wall between the United States and Mexico to growing calls for the abolition of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, common ground hasn’t been easy to find lately. That may be because, as the Mercatus Center’s general director Tyler Cowen recently put it, “Immigration is hard,” and “it’s worth thinking about why immigration policy poses such tough dilemmas and how to fix them.” Here to do just that, we have two top immigration policy experts: Kristie de Pena, director of immigration policy and senior counsel at the Niskanen Center Dan Griswold, director of the program on the American economy and globalization here at the Mercatus Center   Questions, comments, suggestions? Email Chad at creese@mercatus.gmu.edu or find him on Twitter @ChadMReese. 

Inflation, rate hikes, hawks, doves, and yes, even dual-mandates. We’re diving into the exciting and, at times, intractable world of the Federal Reserve today to talk about new-ish Fed Chair Jay Powell and the Fed’s recent announcement that it’s increasing its interest rate target now and in the near future. That makes this the perfect time to talk about the direction the Fed may be heading under Powell’s leadership. Here to answer that question, we have an all-star panel of Fed watchers: Jeanna Smialek, data, demographics, and monetary policy reporter for Bloomberg Joseph Gagnon, international macroeconomist at the Peterson Institute for international economics David Beckworth, economist, scholar with our Program for Monetary Policy here at Mercatus, and host of the podcast Macro Musings   Follow Chad on Twitter @ChadMReese.

Depending on who you ask, Initial Coin Offerings, or ICOs, are a scam, a brilliant new way for cryptocurrency companies to raise startup money, a sneaky way to get around securities regulations, or some combination of the above. What we do know for sure is that ICOs are garnering a lot of attention these days. China outright banned them last year, and the SEC recently launched its own “HowieCoin,” a fake ICO meant to steer potential investors away from scams. To talk about what these things actually are and what they mean for the future of capital markets, we’re joined by three of the best in the field: Brian Knight is the director of the Mercatus Center’s program on financial regulation, and a Mercatus Policy Download veteran Chris Brummer is a Georgetown Law professor, and a leading academic in the financial technology space Lydia Beyoud is a fintech reporter for Bloomberg Law, where she covers the latest market and regulator activity on ICOs and a host of other issues   Follow Chad on Twitter @ChadMReese