Fiscal Decentralization and Government Size

Numerous studies have attempted to model the possible factors contributing to universal growth in public sectors. This paper analyzes one device that appears capable of controlling some of that growth: fiscal decentralization. The results reported here also support the use of monopoly government assumptions in models of public policy. The author gratefully acknowledges the comments of Angelo R. Mascaro, Gordon Tullock and an anonymous referee. Views expressed here are of the author alone and do not necessarily represent those of the U.S. Department of Treasury

Tobacco Control Programs and Tobacco Consumption

No Abstrac

Privatization and Government Size

No Abstrac

Epidemiologic and Economic Research, and the Question of Smoking Bans

Smoking bans in public places are promoted on the dual basis that they protect the public from “secondhand smoke”— environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), and that bans never harm businesses. Evidence shows that ETS does not pose health risks nearly as large as many ban advocates claim, and that bans do harm some businesses. Unintended and adverse consequences of smoking bans include (1) harm to smokers if they compensate by smoking more intensely; (2) an increase in drunk driving when smokers drive longer distances to smoke and drink; and (3) less innovation in air-filtration technology that also slows progress in removing hazards other than tobacco smoke

The Efficient Mix of Staffing Resources

No Abstrac

Honestly, Who Else Would Fund Such Research? Reflections of a Non-Smoking Scholar

Many public-health researchers are quick to raise charges of bias to explain away the few studies that reach politically incorrect conclusions. Claims of bias are often thrown at researchers who are funded by the industries targeted for aggressive intervention. This paper discusses whether it makes sense that bias is a relevant issue only when researchers have connections to private industry or find fault with government intervention. I focus on the issue of whether smoking bans harm any restaurant or bar owners. This area of research has experienced a large number of claims of bias and deception, leveled against research that does not enthusiastically support expanded intervention. This paper diagnoses the groupthink and deep biases of the structures and cultures within which pro-ban research comes into being. It also shows how intimidation is used to silence dissent and enforce taboos. It shows why it is important that we address the question: Who else would fund research that might come to politically incorrect conclusions on such issues

Markets, the Environment and Liberty: The Case of Elephants and Air Quality

No Abstrac

Smoking Laws and Their Differential Effects on Restaurants, Bars, and Taverns

This article examines the effect of restrictive smoking laws on restaurants, bars, and taverns. Supporters of these laws often argue that they do not harm firms and may even raise profits. Opponents argue that owners cater to customer smoking preferences, and laws mandating specific policies will negatively impact profits. This article provides a framework for examining the distribution of effects that smoking laws exert on businesses, and demonstrates that changes in total sales or tax revenues do not provide a meaningful understanding of the economic implications because smoking laws exert different effects on different firms. The distribution of these effects is examined using data from a nationwide survey of 1,300 restaurant, bar, and tavern owners. While some subsets of firms are predicted to suffer revenue declines, bars are predicted to be more than twice as likely to experience losses as restaurants. An important implication is that the increasing level of governmental restrictions on smoking in the hospitality sector could gradually impact the types of service available to the public

The Private Market for Accommodation: Determinants of Smoking Policies in Restaurants and Bars

This study finds an active private market in accommodation of smokers and nonsmokers in Wisconsin restaurants. Empirical analysis indicates that a large number of factors underlie owner decisions regarding how to allocate seating to non-smoking use. Owners not only base their decision on the number of smokers in their community, but also consider customer occupations, presence of children, and whether businesses are located in college towns, as well as type of restaurant and whether the establishment has a general liquor license. Business age, numbers of seats, and membership in a corporate chain also underlie decisions made in the private market for accommodation. Government smoking restrictions that are less than bans overturn all of the factors that owners previously found critical to their choices of accommodation policies, except for the number of smokers in their client base. These findings indicate that an active private market in accommodation is consistent with diversity of smoking policies.Smoking

The National Feral Swine Program, National Strategy – The First Five Years

In 2014, through Congressional direction, the Animal Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) National Feral Swine Damage Management Program was created. While feral swine damage management was certainly not new to APHIS Wildlife Services, this mandate enabled a programmatic and unified approach in combating the destructive forces of feral swine throughout the United States and its territories. Recognizing the variance in environmental conditions and regulatory processes throughout the states, APHIS’ strategy is to provide resources and expertise at a national level, while allowing flexibility to manage operational activities from a local or state perspective. Having completed the first five years of this pursuit, APHIS has compiled a report which serves to describe the program and its components, ongoing collaborative research, the operational approach, and the outreach and communication campaigns. This presentation provided an overview of this report, introducing accomplishments achieved, setbacks encountered, and future considerations. The report will be electronically available on the USDA/APHIS/Wildlife Services web page at: https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/wildlifedamag