When CRI loses its tax exempt status later this year for violating the prohibition against partaking in political activities, it better get lessons in simple math before it starts paying taxes to the federal government. Because, based on the evidence to date, no one at CRI can add, subtract or multiply. And those IRS auditors are very good at math.
David T. Stevenson, a senior fellow at CRI, has authored a “Cost/Benefit” analysis of SB 234, the Recycling Bill. Tommywonk looks at his numbers:
I have found three fundamental flaws in his work, and conclude that it is his analysis that doesn’t add up.
Mr. Stevenson’s analysis uses participation rates and cost estimates of older and far less efficient programs to project the success and cost of universal curbside recycling. He compounds these errors by offering a lowball estimate of the cost of landfilling. These three errors each amount to about an order of magnitude, and together render his conclusions almost completely unreliable.
So today, when CRI and its Republican friends in the General Assembly cite a new study that shows that this bill would cost too much and do too little to increase recycling, remember that the figures in the study are pure bullshit, and that the study itself was prepared only for the partisan purpose of killing the bill. Remember Cathcart throwing his child like temper tantrum last Thursday in blocking debate on this bill in the House? He did so to buy time for third parties to review the bill and come up with reasons to kill it. It is now revealed that Mr. Stevenson and the CRI were Cathcart’s third parties.
The question that has to be asked is this: Is CRI the stooge for the General Assembly Republicans, or is it the other way around?