The Project for the Study of American Capitalism

The Project for the Study of American Capitalism

Created in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, and the government’s subsequent responses, the Project for the Study of American Capitalism at The Mercatus Center is a research program responding to the increased concern about the role of political favoritism in American business.  The project explores the implications of this emerging character of the economy, examining the effects it has on the standard of living in the United States and public perceptions of the legitimacy of government and business. Does it make any difference to average Americans whether ours is a more or less free market? And what can policymakers do to ensure competition and to commit in a credible way to equality of opportunity?

Drawing on hundreds of academics from around the world, the Project for the Study of American Capitalism helps scholars and policymakers investigate the nature of these problems and identify real and sustainable solutions.

Research

Veronique de Rugy, Diane Katz | Apr 15, 2015
Ex-Im Bank advocates emphasize its importance to small businesses and economic growth. A new analysis of government data reveals that Ex-Im Bank’s top 10 overseas buyers are large corporations that primarily purchase exports from multinational conglomerates. Ex-Im Bank’s small business narrative is challenged by the fact that the buyers receiving the most subsidies are—like the exporters—major corporations.
Jayson L. Lusk | Apr 08, 2015
In a new study based on empirical research for the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, agricultural economist Jayson L. Lusk concludes that the reduction or elimination of subsidized crop insurance, SNAP, and ethanol production mandates would reduce food prices for many consumers, benefit food producers who are not heavily subsidized by the government, and provide an overall economic benefit to taxpayers across the United States by potentially decreasing taxes.
Christopher Koopman, Thomas Stratmann, Mohamad Elbarasse | Mar 31, 2015
Thirty-six states and the District of Columbia currently limit entry or expansion of health care facilities through certificate-of-need (CON) programs. These programs prohibit health care providers from entering new markets or making changes to their existing capacity without first gaining the approval of state regulators. Since 1979, Georgia has been among the states that restrict the supply of health care in this way, with 17 devices and services—including acute hospital beds, positron emission tomography (PET) scanners, and open heart surgery—requiring a certificate of need from the state before the device may be purchased or the service offered.
Christopher Koopman, Thomas Stratmann | Mar 24, 2015
Thirty-six states and the District of Columbia currently limit entry or expansion of health care facilities through certificate-of-need (CON) programs. These programs prohibit health care providers from entering new markets or making changes to their existing capacity without first gaining the approval of state regulators.
Christopher Koopman, Thomas Stratmann | Mar 03, 2015
While CON programs were intended to limit the supply of health care services within a state, proponents claim that the limits were necessary to either control costs or increase the amount of charity care being provided. However, 40 years of evidence demonstrate that these programs do not achieve their intended outcomes but rather decrease the supply and availability of health care services by limiting entry and competition. For policymakers in Florida, this situation presents an opportunity to reverse course and open the market for greater entry, more competition, and ultimately more options for those seeking care.
Christopher Koopman | Feb 27, 2015
The real issues should not be lost in the noise. Are people sharing? Not always. But, then again, that really isn’t what the sharing economy is about. Instead, they are benefitting from mutually beneficial interactions that would not be possible without the sharing economy’s platforms.

Testimony & Comments

Veronique de Rugy | Mar 24, 2015
Policymakers who are interested in supporting the entrepreneurs and companies that will deliver the next generation of energy supplies and products should focus their attention on correcting the federal government’s hostile tax climate and dispense with the futile hopes of outsmarting the marketplace.
Christopher Koopman, Scott Eastman | Dec 01, 2014
Focusing on outcomes, rather than outputs, would give theaters more freedom to adjust the amount of devices they need to purchase based on the number of disabled patrons they actually serve.
Veronique de Rugy | Jun 25, 2014
The Bank has long outlived its purpose and cannot manage to meet the standards of the new missions that have been developed to validate its existence. For policymakers who have the facts, the choice is clear: the Export-Import Bank must go.
Veronique de Rugy | Jul 18, 2012
The Department of Energy’s loan guarantee programs have been the focus of much public attention since energy companies Solyndra, Beacon Power, and Abound went bankrupt, leaving taxpayers to shoulder hundreds of mil- lions of dollars in loan guarantees. The evidence strongly suggests that these programs fall short of their stated goals of developing clean energy and creating jobs.
Todd Zywicki | Jul 10, 2012
Much of the government’s political intervention in the bankruptcy cases appears to have been motivated to benefit the UAW rather than the companies themselves over U.S. taxpayers, who put billions of dollars at risk to fund the bailouts.
Veronique de Rugy | Jun 19, 2012
For obvious reasons, more than any other recent events, the waste of taxpayers’ money due to Solyndra’s failure has attracted much attention. However, the problems with loan guarantees are much more fundamental than the cost of one or more failed projects.

Speeches & Presentations

Charts

Veronique de Rugy | Apr 20, 2015
In spite of their complaints about federal overreach, state policymakers are addicted to handouts from Washington because it allows them to spend “free” money instead of asking their constituents to come up with funds via higher taxes. Unfortunately, federal money is not “free,” and the consequence of the federal government’s funding what are properly state and local responsibilities is excessive growth of government at all levels.

Experts

Videos

Veronique de Rugy | March 13, 2015
Mercatus Center Senior Fellow Veronique de Rugy on a Journal investigation that revealed collusion between the Export-Import Bank and its biggest client, Boeing.

Podcasts

Veronique de Rugy | April 07, 2015
Ex-Im Bank provides billions of dollars in financing for foreign firms to purchase American goods, in theory supporting American jobs and promoting economic growth in developing economies. However many of these taxpayer-supported loans simply subsidize large foreign corporations in buying goods from major U.S. firms, instead of serving their intended purpose. Congress must reauthorize Ex-Im by June 2015 or the bank will be shuttered. Veronique de Rugy outlines the problems with Ex-Im in this interview.

Books

' '