EconomyBeat.org » government http://economybeat.org user-generated content about the economy Mon, 14 Nov 2011 17:37:12 +0000 en-US hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1 Podcast highlighting public radio coverage of the economy, the recession, employment, the mortgage crisis and health care issues. Roman Mars no Roman Mars sysadmin.robert@prx.org sysadmin.robert@prx.org (Roman Mars) 2006-2010 Public radio coverage of the economy. economy, healthcare, mortgage, recession, unemployment EconomyBeat.org » government http://economybeat.org/files/2011/11/economybeatpodcast.png http://economybeat.org/category/government/ Sovereign debt credit ratings http://economybeat.org/government/sovereign-debt-credit-ratings/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=sovereign-debt-credit-ratings http://economybeat.org/government/sovereign-debt-credit-ratings/#comments Wed, 28 Apr 2010 19:40:55 +0000 Jon Brooks http://www.economybeat.org/?p=8433 The Greek and European debt crisis has thrown a spotlight on the credit ratings of entire nations. From the blog Credit Writedowns, here’s a list of all S&P sovereign credit ratings, from AAA to junk.

These ratings will in large part determine the rate of interest countries pay to investors who loan them money via purchase of bonds. The lower the rating, the higher the risk the rating agency has determined the country is, and the higher the interest rate that nation will have to pay to attract investors to buy its bonds.

On the other hand, considering the role that the ratings agencies played in the sub-prime real estate implosion, someone may want to rate the raters…

Some selected countries and their ratings. What is striking is the number of “negative” outlooks…

Country

 

Debt Rating

Outlook
United States

 

AAA

Stable
Canada

 

AAA

Stable
United Kingdom

 

AAA

Negative
Spain

 

AA+

Negative
Ireland

 

AA

Negative
Japan

 

AA

Negative
China

 

A+

Stable
Israel

 

A

Stable
South Africa

 

BBB+

Negative
Russia

 

BBB

Stable
Brazil

 

BBB-

Stable
Iceland

 

BBB-

Negative
India

 

BBB-

Stable
India

 

BBB-

Stable
Greece

 

BB+

Negative
Vietnam

 

BB

Negative
Philippines

 

BB-

Stable
Venezuela

 

BB-

Stable
Dominican Republic

 

B

Stable
Pakistan

 

B-

Stable
Iceland

 

BBB-

Negative
Ecuador

 

CCC+

Stable
]]>
http://economybeat.org/government/sovereign-debt-credit-ratings/feed/ 0
A real crisis http://economybeat.org/financial-markets/a-real-crisis/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=a-real-crisis http://economybeat.org/financial-markets/a-real-crisis/#comments Wed, 28 Apr 2010 17:00:03 +0000 Jon Brooks http://www.economybeat.org/?p=8426 MIT economist Simon Johnson writes on the blog The Baseline Scenario that the European debt downgrades of the last two days constitute a genuine crisis:

Wake the President

Most days we can coast along, confident that tomorrow will be much like yesterday. On a very few days we need to look hard at the news headlines, click through to read the whole story, and then completely change a large chunk of how we thought the world worked. Today is such a day.

Everything you knew or thought you believed about the European economy – and the eurozone, which lies at its heart – was just ripped up by financial markets and thrown out of the proverbial window.

While you slept, there was a fundamental repricing of risk in financial markets around Europe – we’ll see shortly about the rest of the world. You may see this called a “panic” and the term conveys the emotions involved, but do not be misled – this is not a flash in a pan; financial markets have taken a long hard view at the fiscal and banking realities in Europe. They have also looked long and hard into the eyes – and, they think, the souls – of politicians and policymakers, including in Washington this weekend.

The conclusion: large parts of Europe are no longer “investment grade” – they are more like “emerging markets”, meaning higher yield, more risky, and in the descriptive if overly evocative term: “junk”.

This is not now about Greece (with 2 year yields reported around 20 percent today) or Portugal (up 7 basis points) or even Spain (2 year yields up 27 basis points; wake up please) or even Italy (up 6 basis points). This is no longer about an IMF package for Greece or even ring fencing other weaker eurozone economies.

This is about the fundamental structure of the eurozone, about the ability and willingness of the international community to restructure government debt in an orderly manner, about the need for currency depreciation within (or across) the eurozone. It is presumably also about shared fiscal authority within the eurozone – i.e., who will support whom and on what basis?

It is also, crucially, about stabilizing the macroeconomic situation without resorting to more unconditional bailouts. Bankers are pounding tables all across Europe, demanding that governments buy out their position – or bring in the IMF to do the same. We again find ourselves approaching the point when the financial sector will scream: rescue us all or face global economic collapse.

The White House did not see this coming – and the Treasury’s attention was elsewhere. The idea that we can leave this to the Europeans to sort out is an idea of yesterday. Today is very different and much more scary.

President Obama is wide awake and working hard. Someone please tell him what is really going on.

]]>
http://economybeat.org/financial-markets/a-real-crisis/feed/ 0
Arizona immigration law provisions http://economybeat.org/government/arizona-immigration-law-provisions/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=arizona-immigration-law-provisions http://economybeat.org/government/arizona-immigration-law-provisions/#comments Mon, 26 Apr 2010 20:19:49 +0000 Jon Brooks http://www.economybeat.org/?p=8348 This Wikipedia entry on Arizona’s anti-immigration law might answer some questions people have about what the exact language of the law mandates.

Law Provisions

The law makes it a state misdemeanor crime for anyone to be unable to prove lawful residence in the United States upon being asked to provide such proof pursuant to a specific section in Title 8 of the United States Code, and requires police to make a reasonable attempt, when practical to determine immigration status if there is cause to suspect they are illegal immigrants. Only when making lawful contact, anyone who appears to be an illegal alien upon reasonable suspicion and fails to produce such proof is subject to arrest without warrant, and, upon confirmation of the individual’s illegal status by the federal government, a fine of at least $500, and up to six months in jail.

A person is “presumed to not be an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States” if he or she presents any of the following four forms of identification: (a) a valid Arizona driver license; (b) a valid Arizona nonoperating identification license; (c) a valid tribal enrollment card or other tribal identification; or (d) any valid federal, state, or local government-issued identification, if the issuer requires proof of legal presence in the United States as a condition of issuance.

SB1070 also prohibits state, county, or local officials from limiting or restricting “the enforcement of federal immigration laws to less than the full extent permitted by federal law” and provides that Arizona citizens can sue such agencies or officials to compel such full enforcement.

In addition, the law makes it a crime for anyone, regardless of citizenship or immigration-status, to hire or to be hired from a vehicle which “blocks or impedes the normal movement of traffic.” Vehicles used in such manner are subject to mandatory impounding. Moreover, “encourag[ing] or induc[ing]” illegal immigration, giving shelter to illegal immigrants, and transporting or attempting to transport an illegal alien, either knowingly or while “recklessly” disregarding the individuals immigration-status, will be considered a class 1 criminal misdemeanor if less than 10 illegal immigrants are involved, and a class 6 felony if 10 or more are involved. The offender will be subject to a fine of at least $1,000 for each illegal alien so transported or sheltered.

Arizona is the first state with such a law. Prior law in Arizona, and the law in most other states, does not mandate that law enforcement personnel ask about the immigration status of those they encounter, and many police departments discourage such inquiries for fear that immigrants will not report crimes or cooperate in other investigations.

]]>
http://economybeat.org/government/arizona-immigration-law-provisions/feed/ 0
A modest proposal http://economybeat.org/government/a-modest-proposal/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=a-modest-proposal http://economybeat.org/government/a-modest-proposal/#comments Mon, 26 Apr 2010 19:59:50 +0000 Jon Brooks http://www.economybeat.org/?p=8343 A Flagstaff, Arizona citizen argues that the state’s new anti-immigration law, requiring law enforcement authorities to determine the immigration status of those they suspect are in the country illegally, does not go far enough. From elephantjournal.com:

Is it just me or has Arizona Immigration Law SB 1070 not gone far enough? If the Arizona police are only going to be stopping Hispanic people and asking for their papers, won’t everyone else feel left out? Being a yoga teacher, this kind of thing concerns me.

So, what if we included everyone so that nobody feels excluded? I’ve sketched out a simple system that should make everyone feel good.

First, we’ll have the government give all the “legals” green armbands that they must wear at all times. It will be for their safety and would end pesky inquiries for papers from law enforcement. Police officers can get back to focusing on crime like robberies, rape, murder, and citizens can breathe a sigh of relief knowing that their brown-skinned neighbors are paying their taxes.

Native Americans can get another color, since they sometimes, you know, look like Mexicans. Maybe turquoise blue, since that color is often associated with “Indians.”

Maybe we should go a step farther, and give all citizens with IQs under 110 an orange band. They will not be allowed to carry guns…

And all of us non-brown folks who have an IQ over 110 get a gold sparkly band, so we can do pretty much whatever we want.

Then, anyone who is overweight has to go to work repairing roads or sewers (for free) until they lose weight as payback to society for taking more resources than one person should. We can use the tax money that would have gone toward infrastructure maintenance and put it back into securing our borders. Hey, these armbands may be cheaper than fitting everyone with microchips but they’ll still cost something!

Anyone not wearing a band is subject to “treatment” – you know, the kind Rumsfeld seems to like. And every now and then, specific band colors (such as green) get special jobs, like cleaning up toxic waste dumps – stuff like that. We can just round them up and have them live in barracks…it’ll be nice for them. They can work all day and feel really good about it.

I haven’t worked out the system completely yet, but I’ve heard about someone from the last century who really thought this one out . . .

I mean seriously, some people are advocating for a fascist state…so why not give it to them?

]]>
http://economybeat.org/government/a-modest-proposal/feed/ 0
The bond bomb http://economybeat.org/financial-markets/the-bond-bomb/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-bond-bomb http://economybeat.org/financial-markets/the-bond-bomb/#comments Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:58:04 +0000 Jon Brooks http://www.economybeat.org/?p=8191 Last week, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania said it won’t make a scheduled bond payment of $425,282 due on May 1st.

Some commentary:

Mish’s Global Economic Trend Analysis

I do not like Munis here. For starters, I think there will be a number of counties in Florida that go bankrupt. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania (the state capitol) is likely to go bankrupt as is Detroit, Michigan.

Yes, everyone is aware of those.

However, when liquidity is flowing everywhere, as it has been since March 2009, nothing seems to matter. Indeed, it is easy to be complacent because nothing matters. The correct way of thinking about this is: nothing matters “now”.

Add in a few cities going bankrupt in California, and in a liquidity crisis I can practically guarantee it will matter. Although there may be some good bets out there, munis seem to be richly priced which means there are better opportunities ahead.

Liquidity is a coward. 2008 in the face of Bernanke’s heroic efforts should be proof enough. Should panic strike again, far better prices lay ahead.

What applies to munis also applies to junk bonds, corporate bonds, and the stock market as well. Whatever you are holding, take some chips off the table.

Bondview.com

Buffet says ” when the tide goes out, you get to see who is swimming naked”.

Harrisburg bonds (41473EFH9) are a mess due to what appears to be wasteful spending. Is this representative of a nationwide muni default? In a word NO. So what happened in Harrisburg?

According to our sources, the Harrisburg incinerator that will likely burn bondholders was a mechanical engineering boondoggle dating back to its inception and went through several refits in an attempt to get it functioning to meet environmental standards. But by then it had acquired so much debt, it could not possibly cover its costs. So now the city and Dauphin County are on the hook for what amounts to about $10k per citizen!

Here is the list of this bond’s trades.

It hasn’t traded Nov 2008. The lack of interest in trading this bear is no surprise since the Harrisburg municipality filed a July 2009 material events notice .

The former Mayor Reed – king of the city for 24 years may have tried to make the city a better place to live but the spending went far out of control. He spent tens of millions building the “national” civil war museum even though Gettysburg is just a 45 minute drive from Harrisburg with it’s own museum run by the national park system. When it was obviously not performing, the Mayor argued it was because the city needed a critical mass of museums before it could be a success. So he planned 5 more including a wild west themed museum! He spent tens of millions on acquiring artifacts, the purchase of which he allegedly personally handled. When finally forced to sell these, the city got less than 20 cents on the dollar. Turns out he’s quite the history buff and many of the artifacts allegedly decorated his office while awaiting the building of the museums. Gee if a small business owner did that an IRS agent would have a field day. But since it was public monies that were spent, no crime but certainly a foul.

This is a case of public spending gone crazy. Where were the auditors? Lumped on top of this self created mess is the local government can’t afford to continue to platinum healthcare & pension benefits to police, fire and teachers. In good times, fat pensions stress cities’ finances and increase our taxes. But In bad times, these debts break the camels back .

Good media sources on this topic include the excellent WSJ article “Muni Threat: Cities Weigh Chapter 9 (2/18/10) Harrisburg Authority, city miss debt payment; Dauphin County pays

That said, the Harrisburg bond problem doesn’t seem representative of a nationwide muni default. With muni rates still low, the problem is a sick facility pushed over the edge due to unique bad economic times. What is interesting is cities may well choose, or be forced to use Chapter 9 causing sweetheart city employee union contracts to be squeezed followed by layoffs. But bondholders will suffer too. Interest payments may be frozen, effected bonds prices will drop 50%+ and when the dust settles, private equity players will swoop in and buy the distressed assets on the cheap. Bahhh and good luck to all

]]>
http://economybeat.org/financial-markets/the-bond-bomb/feed/ 0
Global risk assessment 2010 http://economybeat.org/financial-markets/global-risk-assessment/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=global-risk-assessment http://economybeat.org/financial-markets/global-risk-assessment/#comments Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:29:25 +0000 Jon Brooks http://www.economybeat.org/?p=8125 Chart from the World Economic Forum: Global Risk Landscape 2010, showing the likelihood of specific risks (terrorism, infectious disease, food price volatility, etc.) with corresponding severity of economic loss.

globalrisk

Also look at this “Risks Interconnection Map,” which shows “an overview of all risks and their interconnections.” It’s a little hard to understand but looks like someone really knew what they were doing when it comes to Adobe Flash.

Risk Interconnection Map

Risk Interconnection Map

]]>
http://economybeat.org/financial-markets/global-risk-assessment/feed/ 0
Pennies http://economybeat.org/banking-and-finance/pennies/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=pennies http://economybeat.org/banking-and-finance/pennies/#comments Tue, 06 Apr 2010 18:31:07 +0000 Jon Brooks http://www.economybeat.org/?p=7914 According to this chart from Visual Economics, there are 1.65 trillion pennies in circulation.

penny2

That’s messed up.

]]>
http://economybeat.org/banking-and-finance/pennies/feed/ 0
Dismantling consumer protection – a history http://economybeat.org/banking-and-finance/dismantling-consumer-protection-a-history/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=dismantling-consumer-protection-a-history http://economybeat.org/banking-and-finance/dismantling-consumer-protection-a-history/#comments Mon, 05 Apr 2010 17:38:06 +0000 Jon Brooks http://www.economybeat.org/?p=7844
"Federal regulatory functions all had become dominated by political pressure from the providers of services promulgating ‘free markets’ and ‘lifting the regulatory burden’, greased by millions of dollars of campaign contributions and lobbying."
One of the sticking points in enacting the financial reform bill stuck in the Senate is the creation of a new consumer financial protection agency, which Republicans have ardently opposed.

This post from the financial sector policy blog Finance: Facts and Follies summarizes the dismantling of consumer protections in the mortgage and credit card industries in the 2000s.

Many of the steps violating unsophisticated consumers’ protections against predatory lending came from a cascade of federal, not state, regulatory actions and legislation.]]>
“Federal regulatory functions all had become dominated by political pressure from the providers of services promulgating ‘free markets’ and ‘lifting the regulatory burden’, greased by millions of dollars of campaign contributions and lobbying.”

One of the sticking points in the Senate in enacting the financial reform bill is the creation of a new consumer financial protection agency, which Republicans have ardently opposed.

This post by former World Bank and Federal Reserve economist Barbara N. Opper, on the financial sector policy blog Finance: Facts and Follies, summarizes the dismantling of consumer protections in the mortgage and credit card industries in the 2000s.

Many of the steps violating unsophisticated consumers’ protections against predatory lending came from a cascade of federal, not state, regulatory actions and legislation.

The financial industry’s influence on Washington, evident in the late 1980s when Alan Greenspan went to Chair the Fed, gained momentum between 2000 and 2008 when the industry ‘captured’ the administration and Congress. Investors sophisticated or not lost protection, as did consumers, especially the unsophisticated. As the famous post-Napoleon expression goes, this was “worse than a crime it was a blunder” because US financial institutions’ ability to attract profitable business worldwide rested on the trust that had been the outcome of our once-effective regulation.

To set the stage, in the 1970s a lot of consumer protection came into place. States enacted “Truth in Lending Laws” and the Fed was to handle consumer protections related to bank lending. By then, 64% of residents owned their homes, financed by self-amortizing home mortgages most of which carried fixed rates. With regulators enforcing strict underwriting standards, delinquency and foreclosure rates were very low. Credit cards were issued only to those with very strong credit records.

So when we started hearing about consumers being lured into very disadvantageous credit card and mortgage loans, it was reasonable to ask how so much predatory lending could prevail against Truth in Lending and other consumer protection in place. The answer is two rulings from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). One in 2003 prohibited states from enforcing their own truth in lending laws. Eliot Spitzer, former NY State Attorney General, said “Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye … all 50 state attorneys general and all 50 state banking superintendents actively fought the new rules.” It took until June 29, 2009 for the U.S. Supreme Court to rule in favor of the states. The other, in 2004, prohibited state bank supervisors from inspecting, supervising and overseeing national banks located in their state.

The impact of this regulatory approach on the examination and supervision functions should not be ignored. Examiners used to look at samplings of loan underwriting that would have caught “liars’ loans”, no-down-payment loans, wishful thinking property valuations, and other abuses of the go-go-mortgage lending years from 2003 to 2008. Instead, they focused more on the way banks handled Bank Secrecy Act and Patriot Act laws monitoring customer transactions.

Between 2000 and 2008, the economy was stagnating. Encouraging consumption with ready access to debt evidently turned into a policy tool to maintain economic growth. Household debt doubled. That growth was fueled not just by mortgages but also by credit card use as federal regulators looked the other way while credit cards were issued to youth and other elements of the population ill-equipped to handle such ‘easy’ credit. By then, states could not effectively offset federal regulators’ inaction because of the OCC rulings and the domination of the banking industry by national banks. Also, interest-sensitive home building with its collateral durable goods purchases is always a standard Fed policy tool. With more-than-accommodative monetary policy and lax underwriting standards, home property values rose at a pace never before seen. This was the kind of bubble the Fed was created to prevent. It was possible to track GDP growth with and without consumption fueled by home-equity draws.

Securitization was once a reasonable approach to improving the marketability of a home mortgage portfolio but it became destructive. One reason is lenders’ eliminating the free prepayment option to improve predictability of the payment stream for the investor. That removed a long-standing valuable right of borrowers, especially those who woke up too late to the predatory terms of their mortgages.

Many criticize the patchwork of overlapping banking regulatory authority involving several federal agencies and the state where a bank did business. But these two OCC rulings show the value of that overlap. Federal regulatory functions all had become dominated by political pressure from the providers of services promulgating ‘free markets’ and ‘lifting the regulatory burden’, greased by millions of dollars of campaign contributions and lobbying. If it had not been for these two OCC rulings, state authorities could have prevented the predatory terms foisted on unwitting borrowers.

The United States system had been designed by people who understood the dangers of concentration of wealth and power, moral hazard, conflict of interest and self dealing. It was a lesson learned from the Pecora hearings, and is the lesson to be relearned by the Angelides Commission.

]]>
http://economybeat.org/banking-and-finance/dismantling-consumer-protection-a-history/feed/ 1 State of war http://economybeat.org/health-care/state-of-war/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=state-of-war http://economybeat.org/health-care/state-of-war/#comments Wed, 31 Mar 2010 15:20:27 +0000 Jon Brooks http://www.economybeat.org/?p=7668
“In fact, I believe that the elites have so mistreated the American people that we should declare that a state of war exists between America and Washington.”

Former Federal Reserve economist and economics professor Arnold Kling doesn’t like the new health care law. From The Daily Caller:

Health care bill woke a sleeping giant

For many Americans, March 21, 2010, is a date that will live in infamy. Unlike Pearl Harbor or the September 11, 2001, attacks, which offended nearly all Americans, the health care legislation only angered a significant proportion of the population. However, those of us who are outraged are motivated to wage a long fight, and our aims go much further than rolling back this one bill.

The health care legislation represents a culmination of a sequence of unpopular major initiatives from Washington. First, there was Henry Paulson’s massive transfer of wealth from the people most hurt by the financial crisis to some of the people most responsible for it. Next, came the massive, ill-conceived stimulus bill, which was not timely, targeted, or temporary but instead a pure power grab by Washington. Health care legislation is merely the latest straw.

The American people are watching their country being transformed from an exceptional, vibrant free economy to a broken European welfare state, and many of us do not like the direction of change. We may not know exactly what is in the health care legislation (does anyone?), but we know its intent to assert government authority over health insurance. We know that it creates a large entitlement, paid for in large part by unspecified future cuts in Medicare.

Thanks to the projected Medicare cuts, the Congressional Budget Office scores the health care legislation as deficit-reducing relative to current law. However, current law is unsustainable. Medicare spending will have to be cut in the future in order to avoid national bankruptcy. By diverting projected Medicare cuts into a new entitlement, this legislation makes the impending budget crisis in Medicare loom sooner and deeper…

The public probably does not understand this budgetary legerdemain, but their instinct is to distrust Congress. In this case, the populist instinct is valid, and the elitist contempt for ordinary citizens is quite unjustified.

In fact, I believe that the elites have so mistreated the American people that we should declare that a state of war exists between America and Washington. Our goals in this war must go well beyond the repeal of this year’s health care legislation. Here is a list of additional goals that I would propose:

1. End the current bailouts and prevent future bailouts. Starting immediately, limit the Federal Reserve to holding only Treasury instruments. The Fed needs to go back to being a central bank, not a piggy bank.

2. Cut the pay of civilian Federal workers by 10 percent. The private sector is making painful adaptations to hard times. The government needs to start doing what any other organization would do when its revenues are down.

3. Restructure entitlements so that the future path of spending is sustainable. Congressman Paul Ryan’s “road map” is an example of what an honest budget would look like. If Democrats would prefer higher taxes to such a road map, then those taxes should be explicitly budgeted, rather than pretending that the funds for future benefits are going to appear by magic.

The point here is that health care legislation was just one battle. The overall war is larger. After Pearl Harbor, Japanese Admiral Yamomoto is reported to have said, “I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.” So it should be with us today.

]]>
http://economybeat.org/health-care/state-of-war/feed/ 0
California cannabis http://economybeat.org/government/california-cannabis/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=california-cannabis http://economybeat.org/government/california-cannabis/#comments Tue, 30 Mar 2010 18:37:08 +0000 Jon Brooks http://www.economybeat.org/?p=7651 A California voter initiative to legalize marijuana has officially qualified for the November ballot. From the web site Ballotpedia:

Supporters of legalization are focusing on the benefits they say would flow to the state from taxing marijuana; when marijuana is illegal, it is not taxed. If it was legal, the government would be able to collect the state’s sales tax on it. This would add money to California’s coffers during a time that the budget is out-of-balance.

The domestically grown marijuana crop in California is worth an estimated $14 billion a year, making it an attractive target for taxation in a state with an unstable economy and budget deficit in the tens of billions. According to the state’s Board of Equalization study, the state might generate $1.3 billion in taxes if marijuana is legal and taxed.

Tax Cannabis 2010 is the pro-legalization campaign’s official site, at which you can listen to a radio ad currently running in the San Francisco Bay area and Los Angeles, where medical marijuana dispensaries have already proliferated. The state legalized medical marijuana in 1996.

Law enforcement groups and all of the gubernatorial candidates, including Democrat Jerry Brown, widely caricatured as Governor Moonbeam during his first stint as the state’s chief executive in the 70s, oppose full-scale legalization. Here’s a site from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration called Speaking Out Against Drug Legalization.

And hyere’s one of our most clicked-on links (no idea why), a graphic of potential tax revenue from marijuana production state by state, including the number of marijuana-related arrests in the U.S.

]]>
http://economybeat.org/government/california-cannabis/feed/ 0