Problems with Proposed Puerto Rican Bailout

Share this article on:

premium-nylon-outdoor-puerto-rico-state-flags-4Following in the tradition of sovereign entities that spend too much, grow government too large, and do not bring in enough revenue to balance it all out, Puerto Rico finds itself facing a grave and escalating debt crisis.
This American territory followed a familiar playbook to reach its day of financial reckoning. It failed to balance its budget for more than a decade and, over that time, it routinely increased government expenditure and regularly fell far short of its revenue projections. This is made even worse by an abysmal tax collection record, heavy out-migration to the US mainland, and a labor participation rate just over 40 percent. And it continued to borrow heavily to cover its deficit and avoid laying off government workers, who make up nearly a quarter of the work force.
Unlike other municipal debt catastrophes, however, Puerto Rico’s debt crisis will have huge and important implications for the municipal lending market – and all of its stakeholders – across the United States and even right here in Virginia. Unlike Detroit, Puerto Rico is not a municipality but a territory – far more akin to a state than a city – and there are no existing rules for how Puerto Rico can resolve its debts. Unlike sovereign debt crises abroad, the island falls directly under the purview of the federal government, and the precedents set by Congress in addressing the crisis will have far reaching effects throughout Virginia and the broader United States.
What makes it all the more perplexing is that Virginia Congressman Rob Wittman helped to draft a bill that will unequivocally rattle the municipal market and leave Virginians, in part, footing the bill for Puerto Rico’s financial mismanagement.
Wittman sits on the House Committee on Natural Resources, which has jurisdiction over US territories and recently released a “discussion draft” aimed at addressing this crisis. The bill allows a federally-appointed “Oversight Board” to authorize an ex post facto application of bankruptcy law to Puerto Rico, despite the fact that the island has been explicitly excluded from the bankruptcy code since 1984. This Oversight Board can exert much broader bankruptcy power over the island than is available to states: it not only can authorize Puerto Rico’s municipalities to file for bankruptcy (as Michigan did for Detroit in 2013) but can also authorize the restructuring of Puerto Rico’s own General Obligation debt, essentially allowing the island itself to declare bankruptcy.
This is a very significant precedent to set, because nearly every state, Virginia included, issues the same kind of low-interest General Obligation debt, backed by the “full faith and credit” of the state government. These bonds are a cheap financing tool for states because there is very little risk for investors – states cannot declare bankruptcy. Thus states cannot restructure under bankruptcy protection.
Allowing Puerto Rico the unprecedented power of abridging such debt will come at a direct cost to Virginia and all the other states that rely on the bond market for financing. Once the market sees that “full faith and credit” protections are faulty, borrowing costs will go up for states in accordance with the increased risk. In fact, several state governors have already registered their
alarm to Congress on this point. Likewise, the value of funds holding this debt, which are found in 401Ks and other retirement nest eggs across Virginia and the rest of the country, will be severely shaken.
The draft bill could well have other unintended consequences for Virginians. It includes a legal “stay” mechanism, which blocks certain creditors from pursuing legal recourse against the Puerto Rican Government for missed payments for a period of 18 months.
Similar measures are often enacted by bankruptcy courts under Chapter 9, but the Puerto Rico version is unique in that it applies only to bondholders and there are no corresponding rules governing how this island territory will pay off other creditors. So over the course of the 18 month stay, the island can use its cash to pay off contractors, advisers, pension liabilities, and other creditors while withholding all payment from bondholders. Under this draft bill, Puerto Rico can use money that otherwise would have gone to Virginia retirees who invested in these “safe” bonds to pay off other obligations. Then when the 18 month period of the stay is over, it could turn around and tell the bondholders that their payments can’t be made.
Now, it’s worth noting that none of this is set in stone. The “discussion draft,” by definition, is meant to be reworked as needed until the bill is marked-up later this month. Hopefully, by then, Congressman Wittman and the Natural Resources Committee will come to a solution that holds responsible parties accountable their financial mismanagement and does not come at a cost to blameless Virginians.

Posted in Economy | Comments Off on Problems with Proposed Puerto Rican Bailout

Employment Number Looking Better

Share this article on:

unemployment lineIn March of every year, the Virginia Employment Commission revises previously released employment estimates with more reliable quarterly census of employment and wages data through an annual process known as bench-marking.

If you thought the Richmond region and state were performing a lot better than the numbers had showed, you were right.

The revised figures show that the regional employment grew 4.1 percent in the year ending December 2015, for an addition of 26,121 jobs.

The previous estimates put employment growth at 0.5 percent during the same period, for a gain of 3,150.

With these gains, January 2016 employment in the metro area is 44,000 jobs above its seasonally adjusted peak employment in June 2007 before the Great Recession started.

The upward revision in the pace of growth was not as large as in the state, but the latest figures show the state growing slightly faster rather than slower than the nation.

Employment grew 2.7 percent in the state for the year that ended December 2015, according to the revised numbers compared with 2.0 percent in the nation. The estimate previous to the benchmark had been 1.5 percent in the state compared with 1.9 percent in the nation.

The revised data also show certain sectors of the economy are doing better or worse than initially thought. Most notably, the professional business services sector was revised up to 4.4 percent growth for the year ended December 2015 from 3.7 percent in the previous estimate. The upward revision in this sector, which is reliant on government contracts, signals a reduction in a headwind that had been damping the state’s economic growth.

Nine of the state’s 11 metro areas saw an upward revision in its employment growth rate.

Most national indicators are revised at least one month after the original release, as more information becomes available. And then, once a year, the figures are often revised again based on a broader sampling of data.

The monthly employment numbers for Virginia and the Richmond metro area are based on a sample of firms that represent about 30 percent of the employees in the state. It is called the current employment statistics data.

The data collected through the employment and wage program represent almost a complete count of employment.

More than 96 percent of civilian jobs are counted through this wage and salary program because employers are required by law to provide the employment commission with a quarterly count of the number of employees covered under unemployment insurance.

Email this author

Posted in Economy, Latest | Comments Off on Employment Number Looking Better

Implications of Concession Company Chapter 11 Filing

Share this article on:

wheel-of-fortune-bankrupt-game-tv-show-spinEarly this month, the SH 130 Concession Company in Texas filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The company was formed by Cintra and Zachry to finance, build, operate, and maintain Segments 5 and 6 of the SH 130 toll road that parallels congested I-35 between Austin and San Antonio. As is usual in such situations, the company is continuing to operate and maintain the toll road during the bankruptcy process, while it continues discussions with its lenders on restructuring the project’s finances for the longer term.

P3 opponents have seized on this event, implying that it proves that P3s are a bad idea. While it might turn out to be a bad deal for the bond-holders and the equity providers (Cintra and Zachry), the restructuring should have no adverse impact on toll road customers or on taxpayers. There have been several such bankruptcy filings for U.S. toll roads during the past decade, and several others in Australia. In none of these cases have toll road users been adversely affected, nor have there been any taxpayer bailouts.

P3 concession projects that have filed for bankruptcy share one common feature. As Virginia DOT’s P3 Director Doug Koelemay pointed out in a January 29th Brookings post, the projects that have gotten into trouble all based their financial plans on overly optimistic traffic and revenue projections carried out prior to the Great Recession. The SH 130 project was financed in 2008, based on such projections. Projects in those years were also highly leveraged, with a high ratio of debt to equity. A large amount of equity provides a cushion, in case revenue goes below projections. In a toll road financial structure, all the debt providers are entitled to get paid on schedule; the equity providers are in second place. So if the financing is 80% debt, and toll revenues are only half what was projected, the company would be in a much worse situation than if only 60% of the financing was debt and needed to get paid out of the toll revenue.

There are two main alternative outcomes of the bankruptcy proceeding for a P3 toll road, depending on the numbers and the players involved. If the current traffic and revenue projections are positive enough, the bondholders may be willing to renegotiate the financing, altering the debt structure and/or requiring the equity providers to put in more equity. In that case, the concession company would continue as the operator of the facility. If no such agreement can be reached, the bondholders typically have the right to put the company into receivership, seeking a new concession company to take over the remaining years of the concession under an agreeable financing plan. In that alternative, the original equity providers might lose all of their equity investment—a risk they accepted when they invested.

This kind of situation demonstrates that risk transfer in P3 concessions is real. Everybody knows that “greenfield” (i.e., brand new) toll roads are risky endeavors. That is a good reason for shielding taxpayers from such risks, by finding private-sector investors with a solid track record of designing, building, and operating toll facilities who are willing to take those risks.

(This column first ran in the March 2016 issue of Surface Transportation Innovations)


Email this author

Posted in Transportation | Comments Off on Implications of Concession Company Chapter 11 Filing

Seed Controversy Continues

Share this article on:

seed1CropLife America, American Seed Trade Association, American Soybean Association, National Association of Wheat Growers, National Corn Growers, Agricultural Retailers Association, among others, are standing up to help American farmers use treated seeds and seed treatments.

A coalition of petitioners including non-government organizations, beekeepers and farmers are claiming seeds coated with neonicotinoid pesticides are not eligible for the treated seed exemption created by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Petitioners are arguing that each coated seed is a separate unregistered pesticide that has not been properly evaluated and approved by EPA. They also argue that pesticide loss from these coated seeds creates environmental harm which EPA has not properly considered.

The Petitioners want a U.S. District Court in San Francisco to stop EPA from allowing any new unregistered seeds to be coated with systemic insecticides which have pesticidal effects extending beyond the seed.

Farm organizations listed above have organized and filed the appropriate paperwork to participate (Interveners) in the EPA case and support farmers. CropLife and others claim nonprofit groups and other petitioners are seeking to upend EPA’s process for regulating seed treatments. If Petitioners win, EPA would be forced to stop the sale, distribution, and use of new seeds treated with systemic insecticides. The farm organizations claim “In addition to causing significant economic hardship to members of all Proposed Interveners, Plaintiffs’ requested relief would also impose new, unnecessary regulatory burdens on those members who produce, sell, and grow crops from seed.”

Interveners tell the Court they must be part of this lawsuit because seed treatments do involve the direct application of a pesticide to the surface of a seed and that such treatment provides protection to the seed during its most valuable developmental stage.

The farm interveners tell the Court that “Seed treatment insecticides and fungicides were introduced decades ago to address seed-borne pathogens inside or accompanying the seed; soil-borne pathogens that survive in soil or crop residue; and insects that feed on seeds and seedlings.” The interveners describe how successful seed treatments have been in eradicating pests and protecting seeds at their most vulnerable stage of development.

Farm interveners advise that such seed treatment helps reduce the amounts of broadcast sprays needed to protect a crop. The farm groups argue they should be allowed to intervene as a matter of right in this case.

There are several thresholds the farm groups must meet, and let us hope that a U.S. District Court in San Francisco agrees that farm groups can intervene in a timely matter.

CropLife advises the Court its members have invested enormous sums of money to obtain and maintain registrations for the seed treatments that Plaintiffs are attempting to stop.

Powerful argument

The American Seed Trade Association makes a powerful argument when it tells the Court “…if treated seed were to be regulated as pesticides, ASTA members in the business of applying seed treatments may be required to register their seed production facilities as pesticide manufacturing facilities with EPA…”.

Farmer affidavits tell the Court that without necessary seed treatment, growers will be unable to protect seeds from early-season insects, pests, and diseases.

The Agricultural Retailers Association advises the Court that ARA members will be barred from selling treated seed until EPA completed all of its studies and therefore would cost ARA members enormous sums of money.

The farm organizations make it clear in the court filing that EPA cannot and probably will not represent the interest of their organizations and their members. They also say “EPA does not share Proposed Interveners’ interest in protecting the commercial value of seed treatment registrations, developing and selling treated seed, and using those seeds for producing valuable crops.” (This statement cannot be argued with.)

EPA filed on March 10, 2016, a Motion to Dismiss the seed treatment case claiming that the nongovernmental organizations, beekeepers and farmers cannot bring their case because these groups are seeking a review of a guidance document which does not constitute final agency action.

I suspect the Court will not find EPA’s arguments compelling so intervention by CropLife and other farm organizations representing your interests is critical for agriculture.

(This column first ran in Farm Futures on April 4, 2016)


Email this author

Posted in Agriculture, Environment | Comments Off on Seed Controversy Continues

Poll Reveals Voters Are Uninformed About Major Issues

Share this article on:

pollsWhat do voters truly understand about policy issues that have major impacts on society? In the final weeks of 2015, Just Facts commissioned a nationwide poll to scientifically determine this.

While most polls focus on public opinion, this one measured voters’ knowledge of issues that have substantial consequences for Americans. The poll consisted of 23 questions about education, healthcare, taxes, government spending, global warming, Social Security, energy, hunger, pollution, and the national debt.

Overall, the majority of voters gave the correct answer to only five of the 23 questions. This indicates that many voters may be casting ballots based on false views of reality.

The highest levels of ignorance were found on questions related to tax burdens, child hunger, landfills, education spending, Social Security finances, and health insurance co-payments. In these cases, less than 25% of voters provided the correct answer, and in one case, only 9% of voters did.

The poll also recorded voters’ age, sex, and political inclinations. This allows it to pinpoint segments of society that are misinformed about specific issues. The results show deep partisan and demographic divides, with different groups being more or less knowledgeable depending upon the question.

This is the fourth annual poll commissioned by Just Facts. This year, four new questions were added to address the issue of education, and the sample size was increased by 40% to achieve greater precision.

The poll was conducted by Conquest Communications Group, a professional polling firm located in Virginia. The responses were obtained through live telephone surveys of 700 likely voters across the continental United States on December 15–20, 2015. Likely voters are those who say they vote “every time there is an opportunity” or “in most elections.”

The margin of sampling error for all voters is plus or minus 3.8% with a 95% level of confidence. The margin of error for Republican voters is 6.2%, for Democratic voters 6.6%, for undecided voters 7.7%, for males 5.5%, for females 5.2%, for 35- to 64-year olds 5.6%, and for 65-plus-year olds 5.2%. The sample sizes of third-party voters and 18–to 34-year olds are too small to produce meaningful data.

A sample of questions and results from the poll include the following:

Question: On average across the United States, how much do federal, state, and local governments spend per year to educate each classroom of public school students? Less or more than $150,000 per classroom per year?

Correct Answer: More than $150,000. The average cost to educate a classroom of public school students is about $280,000 per year. Correct answer given by 32% of all voters, 24% of Democratic voters, 40% of Republican voters, 34% of undecided voters, 41% of males, 24% of females, 33% of 35- to 64-year olds, and 31% of 65-plus-year olds.

Question: Do you think the federal government spends more money on social programs, such as Medicare, education, and food stamps—or does the federal government spend more money on national defense, such as the Army, Navy, and missile defense?

Correct Answer: Social programs. In 2014, 61% of federal spending was for social programs, and 19% was for national defense. Half a century ago, the converse was true, and 53% of federal spending was for national defense, while 21% was for social programs. Correct answer given by 45% of all voters, 21% of Democratic voters, 69% of Republican voters, 44% of undecided voters, 48% of males, 43% of females, 47% of 35- to 64-year olds, and 43% of 65-plus-year olds.

Question: On an average day, what portion of U.S. households with children have at least one child who experiences hunger? Less than 1%, 1% to 10%, or more than 10%?

Correct Answer: Less than 1%. Per the latest data from the USDA, on an average day, less than one quarter of one percent (0.23%) of households with children have a child who experiences hunger. Correct answer given by 13% of all voters, 6% of Democratic voters, 22% of Republican voters, 9% of undecided voters, 17% of males, 10% of females, 13% of 35- to 64-year olds, and 13% of 65-plus-year olds.

The questions and results from all 23 questions are located here.

Posted in Government Reform, State Government | Comments Off on Poll Reveals Voters Are Uninformed About Major Issues