Maybe they'll feel the heat
Phil Dillon - Emporia
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
IN THE JULY 21 editorial, Patrick Kelley did a great job of identifying our local government’s approach to taxes, budgeting, appropriations and spending. Simply put, it’s a matter of conquering by way of confusion.
Are we going to get a 1-cent sales tax? Is the proposed tax designed to eliminate the strain on our real estate taxes? Could it be that we’re going to get a five mill increase in the county budget? Or is it three? Or are we going to wind up with both a one cent increase in the sales tax and a mill levy increase thrown in for good measure? The county commissioners aren’t saying much, possibly preferring to swoop in under the public radar. The one commissioner who is speaking, Bob Davis, has “flatly rejected the idea of public hearings on the proposed (sales) tax.” He was even bold enough to proclaim, “You’re not elected to listen. You’re elected to do.”
Comforting words, eh?
The city seems to be following suit. On June 26 the city commission approved $270,000 worth of improvements to W.L. White auditorium, including a paint job and a new logo to replace the “dated” one at mid court. The rationale, according to the assistant city manager, is so that we can be a smaller version of Kansas City, with its Sprint Center, or Tulsa, with its Bank of America Center. We’re being told we should consider the improvements economic development tools.
The only dissenter was Mayor Agler, who asked, appropriately, “Is that where you’d put your personal money on this building and at this point in time?” Commissioner Johnson, speaking for the majority, said yes. “This is the time that we have the opportunity to work with various groups and I think it’s an opportunity we should seize.”
It’s funny. I’ve been to W.L White many times in the past nine years. I’ve seen a lot of great basketball. I’ve whooped and hollered with the thousands of fans who have been every bit as entertained as me. Not once in all that time have I heard someone say, “Would you look at that outdated logo?” I’ve never heard anyone suggest, other than the commissioners, that a new paint job would bring the throngs in from near and far. We must be sitting in the wrong sections or attending the wrong meetings.
It’s not that our local politicians have cornered the market on arrogance. There’s more than enough of that to go around. I recently watched a Democrat and a Republican, members of the congressional subcommittee on energy, explaining to the public plans to fix our energy problems by the year 2030. After all, they reasoned, the necessary junkets, studies, surveys and commissions take a lot of time and tax money. When constituents called in to complain about the timeline they got the same treatment people here in Emporia got from Bob Davis. “Just shut up and keep buying the four dollar gas like the rest of the good people of America.” “We don’t get paid to listen; we get paid to act.”
While all of this is being played out in the political arena, reality is setting in on the rest of us every day. Foreclosures, even here in Emporia, are on the rise. Banks are failing. Inflation is rising at its fastest rate in 20 years. Gasoline is four bucks a gallon. Real wages, particularly for blue collar workers, are declining. The cost of bailing out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is estimated to be $25 billion. While the government isn’t saying who is going to foot the bill, rest assured it will be you and me. Our national and personal debt is now in the trillions. Government now spends 53 percent of the total national income earned. Businesses are laying people off; unemployment is on the rise. What seemed to be promising startup ventures a couple of years ago have been delayed or canceled due to lack of funding. Hundreds of billions of dollars in American wealth is being transferred each year to off-shore economic interests. Even more troubling is the fact that much of that wealth is now in the hands of our enemies.
I did take some odd comfort from learning that our government, at all levels, has become a lumbering giant, unable, or perhaps unwilling, to respond or act on behalf of the people. Things are gridlocked. Why the comfort, then? In part because the gridlock is bi-partisan and in part because it means we’re on our own, that it’s up to us to solve the problems. I suppose it would be fair to say that government has been taking its cues from us. We’ve spent needlessly for years, so why shouldn’t government? But, unlike government, we seem to be learning our lessons. We’re driving less and less. We’re spending more money at discount retailers and discount clubs like Sam’s and Costco. We’re putting off discretionary spending we’d have considered absolutely necessary a year or so ago. Our past justifications for spending like drunken sailors have been melted away by the realities we now face. So, we no longer “need” that shiny new SUV. We no longer “need” the 5,000 square foot home in the suburbs. I met a young man on an elevator about a week ago. He was toting a bicycle downstairs. I asked him how far he was going. “About a mile and a half to work,” he replied. He then went on to explain he’d opted out of his lease north of town, sold his Cadillac Escalade, bought the small loft he lives in and now rides his bicycle to work, to the grocery store and for the sheer joy. Things like this are going on all around this country. Could it be that the harsh economic realities we face have turned us back to antiquated notions like Puritan thrift and good sense?
What does all this mean to us here in Emporia ? Will our government see the light? I doubt it. The sales tax will probably slide in under the radar. An increase in the county mill levy will probably follow. And, we’ll get that shiny new logo at mid-court. In a New York Times op-ed July 22, David Brooks noted that we rarely change behavior because we see the light. We change because we feel the heat. It’s a lesson government hasn’t learned yet and I don’t think that reasoning with them will win the day. Our only hope is that “the pitiless crowbar of events” will overtake them and they’ll feel the heat.
Phil Dillon, who is retired, was a candidate for Emporia City Commission in last year’s election.
Comments
We allow registered users to post comments on this Web site. To learn more about our posting policies please read our User Poster Agreement Policy.
Posted by dale011 (anonymous) on July 30, 2008 at 5:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Phil, are you really surprised by the commissioner's statement? It is exaclty what we should expect from him after the way that group has governed for the time I've been around Emporia - meetings held with little public notice, sliding things past us so they can take care of their "good old boys" interests. I normally don't believe in bashing folks, but in this case, we need new leadership - we need it sorely, we need it soon.
Posted by jayhawker (anonymous) on July 30, 2008 at 6:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Phil: Thanks for the well done article. I am amazed at three things: 1) Our leadership does not seem to have any clear strategy for economic recovery, and what strategy that it does have, it acts contrary to (wanting a sales tax at the same time that it wants to recruit new retail); 2) a first semester economics student knows that it is basic that tax increases are the worst thing possible in economic downturns, yet our leadership proposes just that; and 3) our community has not demanded that something be done about numbers 1 & 2. I don't know which is more disappointing.
Posted by dhcc66 (anonymous) on July 31, 2008 at 8:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
ok jayhawker, would you rather have a few more mills put on your property taxes then? i know either way it's taxes, but take your pick. the city has already whittled it's way down to nothing on staffing, equipment, and services. Unless you can get the comissioners to stop their excess spending on their pet projects, we have no more room to cut expenses.
Again, I would urge somebody, especially the Gazette and Gwen Larson, to do some very heavy investigative reporting and digging into exactly where our tax dollars are going.
Posted by Fixed_News (anonymous) on July 31, 2008 at 12:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Actually under the Keynesian scale of economics it is bad to cut taxes during a recession. Cutting taxes when the economy is in a recession, or downturn, helps boost inflation. Any first year economics student would know that. Tax cuts should occur during the time when the economy is actually doing well.
Posted by Fixed_News (anonymous) on July 31, 2008 at 1:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Also, don't count on the Gazette or Gwen Larson doing any serious investigative reporting. That would be too much work and would upset too many people. The Gazette can't afford that. They may lose anymore readers or advertisers.
Posted by jayhawker (anonymous) on July 31, 2008 at 1:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Fixed_News: Wow, where did you go to school? The Keynesian model is the best well known. It's premise is that the free market will best provide economic vitality. In order to do that, the government needs to stay out of it as much as possible. When economic downturns come, the government needs to take less money out of the hands of consumers and investors alike in order for the market to grow. In the early 1960's, for example, John F. Kennedy cut taxes to stimulate the economy, and it worked. Reagan did the same in the early 1980's, again with success. It worked again in the early 2000's. Think about it logically. Raising taxes when the economy is strapped (and I assume that you agree that our local economy is in the worst shape that it has been in a long, long time) means people have less money to spend and invest locally. It makes no sense. Further, if our strategy is to bring in new retail businesses, raising sales taxes (which makes their products more expensive) is counterproductive. I am making two arguments: 1) Don't raise taxes at all; and 2) If you must, don't do it with a sales tax.
dhcc66: I understand your point and I concede that you are right on the effects on city services if taxes are not increased. I would make two points on that: 1) the City Commission needs to prioritize what services we need from those that would be nice, but we can get by without. For example, I believe that we need police and fire protection. Those programs need priority over others. 2) As painful as it will be, if we want long term recovery, we need to sacrifice during this critical period. If you squeeze a balloon in the middle, it pops out on the end (or explodes). We need to have the government get out of the way and let the market's natural forces adjust our economy in order to restore balance. If anyone tells you differently, apply common sense to his statement and it will be obvious that that person is wrong.
Posted by jayhawker (anonymous) on July 31, 2008 at 1:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
One other point, Fixed_News. Inflation is the result of tax and interest rate increases. Remember Jimmy Carter's presidency? Interest rates and inflation reached 20% by the time that he left office. Reagan (who followed Carter) cut taxes in order to get inflation under control. Inflation results from the exact opposite of what you suggest. Inflation is not our concern right now - recovery is, but even if it were, tax reduction would be the solution.
Posted by gazette_reader (anonymous) on July 31, 2008 at 2:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Phil, this was a really smart piece. Thank you.
Posted by dhcc66 (anonymous) on July 31, 2008 at 4:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
why would the Gazette doing an investigative piece on where the city is mis-spending it's money cost it readers?? If anything, I would think that it might boost the readership. This city is ready to hear why we can't make ends meet, even more so than lots of other citites who are in the same financial straits.
me thinks that maybe that poster is a city commissioner????
Posted by netloafer (anonymous) on July 31, 2008 at 6:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
FixedNews
I'm not an economist. I did take one undergraduate course in economics, so I do know about about supply/demand, Malthus' iron law of wage, elastic and inelastic demand.
I tried once to read Das Kapital, but wound up giving up because it was too ponderous. I did find "Wealth of Nations" more understandable. I've read a lot of F.A. Hayek (The Road to Serfdom and The Fatal Conceit). One thing Hayek would say is that tax policy, when applied in a heavy handed manner, is "the road to serfdom." It is very true that the power to tax is the power to control, and the higher the level of taxes, the higher the level of government control, at any level, federal, state,or local.
Socialists used to argue that planned economies and high taxes led to productivity gains and that industrial output in a planned, highly tax leveraged economy would far outstrip industrial output in a low tax, laissez faire economy. They also argued that such a system would be much more fair because it would redistribute wealth fairly. History and experience proved otherwise. When the Soviet Union was confronted with the fact that workers' wages in free market economies were going up and those of Soviet workers were stagnant or falling along with every other measure of living standard, the only argument they could offer was "It's because capitalists are bribing the workers."
Beyond the wages, though, the critical thing was that people were losing freedoms, both economic and political. That's the nature of government control. Now I suppose it could be said that such a system was, in one sense, fair. What it amounted to was the equal distribution of economic pain. Everybody except the party insiders was equally poor.
Now I'm not a first year economics student, so I don't know what the full impact of lowering taxes in the time of an economic downturn would be. But I do know that raising taxes at any time has a slow, corrosive effect on those who pay the taxes. The more of our money government gets, the more we lose economically and politically.
It doesn't take a first year economics student to control an economy. All it takes is will and power. Nikita Kruschev was a pipe fitter by trade. He knew absolutely nothing about economics. Uncle Joe Stalin made him minister of the Soviet agrictulture. Nikita was terrified of the purges and figured out how to survive them. He built a beaurocracy. There was a minister of winter wheat. The ministry of the beet and the carrot, etc., etc., etc. When Stalin's five year plans inevitably failed, Kruschev would offer up the minister of the wheat , then the minister of the beet when the next plan failed. The beauty of it all for Uncle Joe and Nikita was that the Kulaks could keep paying and they could keep purging.
The really interesting thing is that when Nikita became premier he told us he was going to bury us. Well, Ronald Reagan and his supply siders had the last laugh.
Posted by justthefacts (anonymous) on July 31, 2008 at 8:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Jayhawker, as I recall, Reagan cut taxes on the back on some of the biggest budget deficits in history until George W cut taxes without the matching income. I think you would agree that the dollars's value now is no better or worse than before the budget cuts and not because of inflation, because of the devaluation of the value of the American worker and the related reduction of benefits of employment on the backs of workers to benefit shareholders who get those capital tax breaks. Economics 101 made it clear that tax cuts without a matching funding source for replacement is just putting off the inevitable. We are paying the piper. This town is basically paying the price for past bonding and there is no end around it other than increasing revenue. There is only so much to cut back and after seven years of it, there isn't anything left other than just shutting the place down and giving it back to the gophers and coyotes. Ironically Kruschev is probably rolling in his grave...from laughter based on the intoward bickering and lack of vision we seem to be experiencing around here these days.
Posted by netloafer (anonymous) on July 31, 2008 at 8:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
justthefacts
I'm amazed. If Nikita is rolling over in his grave, I'd have to say that Orwell is rolling over in his as well. I wasn't aware that the idea of supporting cascading tax increases was tanatamount to being a visionary. Up is down....Bad is good....Why not have governmet take it all and we'll become a nation of seers and prophets.
Posted by justthefacts (anonymous) on July 31, 2008 at 9:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Please, be careful with the colorful metaphors. I've read Orwell and actually studied him. His biggest concern was ignorance and well intentioned, mis-guided populace who get so reliant on the government for everything they can't do anything without it. If most people here would provide for their neighbor, handle their own affairs, pay their fair share of taxes, contribute to charities, give of their time to mow parks, clean and paint the civic center and volunteer at the fire and police deparments, parks, public works, etc., we wouldn't need tax rates.
I just don't agree with your point of view and never will. That's why there needs to be opposing voices to allow others the right to share their opinions as well. Ironically, some would argue that Orwell himself was a communist in sheep's clothing.
Posted by justthefacts (anonymous) on July 31, 2008 at 9:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
As a post script to the objectivity of any newspaper to take on sensitive issues, consider that papers the size of the Gazette are heavily reliant on advertising revenue for their survival. The days of the crusading newspaper publisher are gone. The only reason these forums are here is because it sells. If they starting hurting the revenue stream of the paper, they would be gone in a heartbeat.
Posted by netloafer (anonymous) on July 31, 2008 at 9:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
justthe facts
I suspect most people do help their neighbors. Most handle their affairs. Most of us don't want to rely on the government for everything. Outside of those who get mowing orders, most mow their yards (I have noticed a few city owned spots where the grass is a tad on the high side, but I don't think they'll get a mowing order). Most of us gladly contribute to charities and civic organizations. Most of us volunteer. And, most of us pay our fair share of taxes (slum lords and such excluded).
But, not to worry. I'm sure that you'll get the sales tax increase, and a mil levy increase, and an increase in water rates, and an increase in the school mil levy. We'll pay it. But unlike the more visionary among us, we won't do so with the same delight. We just can't bring ourselves to adopt the "Oh joy, oh joy" mantra.
Posted by jayhawker (anonymous) on July 31, 2008 at 9:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
justthefacts: I'm not sure I understood your point, but it seemed to be that reducing taxes creates deficits. That may or may not be true at the national level, but it is irrelevant to our discussion because Kansas, since Alf Landon's first term (1933), has had a Cash Basis Law, prohibiting local government from deficit spending. The question before us in 2008 Emporia is what are we to do to recover from the loss of about 2,000 jobs. That completely overshadows what services the city will offer, for you see, justthefacts, we cannot have our cake and eat it, too. If we don't recover, and continue to spiral downward, it will not matter what services the city provided in the year 2008. We are at a critical junction. Our leaders have put our recovery eggs in retail's basket. If retail is to be our savior, let's deal with a simple, straight forward question: Can you see, yes or no, that increasing the Sales Tax, causing retail goods to increase in cost, will both reduce the draw to new retail and depress retail sales? Since you already told us that you have an economics background, your answer is, of course, that yes, you can see that (a no answer would suggest that you didn't do very well in your course of study, but from your posts, I know that you did very well). Having now established that, can you see, yes or no, that increasing the sales tax is counterproductive to our strategy for recovery (bring in new retail)? The answer, of course, is obvious. Thus, if we must raise taxes, it does not make sense to do it with a sales tax. If we are to raise taxes at all, the property tax is our only other option, which is preferable to the sales tax. However, because our local economy is still reeling from the loss of 2,000 jobs, we should not take money from our local consumers at all because we need the local economy to increase. To do that, perhaps we need to let local government decrease in order to reach an economic balance. Its time for government to get out of the way and let the market forces provide a recovery. Obviously, because of the Cash Basis Law, city government may well have to curtail services. The commission is going to have to make hard choices. I submit that it needs to get to basic services - fire, police, streets, water and sewage. Other things will just have to wait for better times, for you see, to do otherwise means that better times may never come our way again. It is that serious.
Posted by netloafer (anonymous) on July 31, 2008 at 10:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
justthefacts
I believe jayhawker has hit the nail on the head. What do we really need?
I remember the first "real" job I ever had. I sold encyclopedias door to door. The company trained me for a few days so that I could get the routine down pat. "Get their undivided attention." "Turn their TV off if you have to." "Convince them they need that set of encyclopedias." "Tell 'em it'll only cost them a dime a day....less than the cost of a cup of coffee."
I well remember my first night out in the marketplace. My "trainer" took me to one of the worst sections of town. I rang the first doorbell and actually got invited in. It was a single dad and his son. I ran the routine to perfection. I got their attention. I even politely turned of the TV (they were watching Chet Huntley and David Brinkley's news broadcast). I gave them the old "dime a day thing." And, they were ready to buy. But, like a bolt out of the blue I had a nagging pang of conscience. I knew this family couldn't afford the encyclopedias, nor did they need them. I folded up the materials and told the man, "I noticed a public library at the end of your block when we came in. They have lots of encyclopedias there. Why don't you send your son down there. It's free." With that I left, with my "trainer" in full fury behind me. I got fired about five or six steps outside the man's door and had to take a bus home. But, I slept really well that night.
I think there are lots of people here in Emporia who really can't afford the raises in sales tax we're going to get or the hikes in water rates or the inevitable raises in the real estate mil levies. But, they're gonna' get them and they're gonna' underwrite a lot of things they really don't need with money that could/should be theirs, like golf courses and junkets to Las Vegas. But then, "It's only about a buck a day...less than the cost of a cup of coffee."
Posted by Summer_Breeze (anonymous) on August 1, 2008 at 8:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Justthefacts, I'd like to shake your hand! What a great story about your encyclopedia sales job.
You're right--there are lots of Emporians who can't afford any of the increases they're probably going to be handed by the local politicians. My question is, where are these people when these things are being discussed by those politicians? There are too many citizens who either don't know how, or are too lazy, to make their voices heard. We need to ROAR about these things.
If you're willing to accept a cut in services to hold the line on taxes, you need to let your government officials know that. If you're outraged by expenditures for non-essentials, you need to let your government officials know that. If you have an opinion about effective economic development, don't hesitate to let your government officials know that. Speak out! And don't do it only with your voice--do it with your vote!!
Be involved, or you forfeit your right to complain. That's my philosophy.
Posted by netloafer (anonymous) on August 1, 2008 at 9:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Summer_Breeze
The sales job was actually mine, not justthefacts.'
The reason I told it was because I think that all too often little or no thought is given to the impact our financial agendas have on others.
There are a lot of people in this city right now living on the margins. These taxes are being sold as absolute necessities, but I have some serious mis-givings about that.
Here's another example. My wife and I moved her mother and developmentally disabled brother to Emporia about eighteen months ago. She's eighty-nine and gets a small pension from her deceased husband's years at Ford and social security. It's a really "fixed" income. She owned a home in Shanwee, KS. It was about 2500 sq feet, far too big for her. Her annual real estate taxes were about $1300 a year, based on a valuation of about $170,000 on the house. The home we bought for her here is about 1100 sq feet, much more manageable. Her real estate taxes have risen a bit over 50% since she moved here. Her real estate taxes on this smaller home are about $1700 a year on a lower home valuation! There's been one water rate hike and we're going to get another one of about 13% soon. There will in all likliehood be a one cent rise in the sales tax. And, despite what our leaders are saying, the mil levies will probably go up as well (have you seen the first peek at the 2009 USD253 budget?).
These new taxes are being touted as absolute necessities. They're using the old "it's less than the cost of a cup of coffee a month" routine to justify it. Really? A 13% rise in water rates will cost my wife's mother about $16 a month. food for her and her son will cost an additional five. Etc., etc., etc. But, "It's less than the cost of a cup of coffee a month," right?
We watch her every day pinching pennies, trying to make ends meet. She acts responsibly. This is a woman who worked in a defense plant in Kansas City during WWII. She's done her part.
I'm not saying these things to evoke sympathy. She's not at all a-typical in this city. There are lots of folks in the same situation. They don't use the golf course and they can't afford a junket or two to Las Vegas every year. A lot of the folks this is impacting are the types who might make the golf clubs at minimum wage (if we had a plant here), but couldn't ever afford to play a round of golf. But, we'll keep the golf course and eliminate the taxi subsidy for low income, often disabled, people.
I know what my vote will be next Tuesday. My vote will probaly be part of the minority report. I suspect the Sheriff of Nottingham and crew will get their tax increases. The junkets will continue. Tee times will be met, the greens will continue to have that manicured look. My wife's mom and all the others living on the margins? They'll just have to make do.
Posted by create (anonymous) on August 1, 2008 at 10:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't know, netloafer, you might be surprised in your prediction. I keep talking to more and more people who plan to vote "NO," and their thinking is based on typical experiences like those of your mother-in-law. Taxes and other living expenses keep going up, income stays the same, and people are stretched to the max. On top of all that, the cost of food, they tell us, will likely go up another 5% in the next year.
This week's fiasco involving the county spending $6,000 on office furniture for one person may likely be the swan song for the sales tax proposal because people are getting sick and tired of having to cut back in their own homes yet still support growing demands for more from their own government.
Posted by netloafer (anonymous) on August 1, 2008 at 10:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Create
I'm torn between hope and the realities of politics here in Emporia. I really hope you're right
Isn't this something? Office furniture....junkets....the list goes on. And, of course, it's all perfectly justifiable. It's "easy." All the commissioners need to do is flick their wrists, sign on their dotted lines, and it's done.
This is getting too much like a game show. If it were Jeopardy I think I'd be inclined to say, "I'll take anarchy for $2000, Alex."
Posted by dhcc66 (anonymous) on August 1, 2008 at 11:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)
hey net, the cities grass is on the high side because the taxpayers don't want to pay for any more people to mow the grass...try that one on for size. if the city gets a mowing order posted on it's own land, do we as taxpayers have to foot the bill too??
Posted by under_score (anonymous) on August 1, 2008 at 1:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
For being so understaffed the city workers seem to find time to do a lot of standing around, stopping by yard sales(on work time), etc. It is time to cut back. That means staffing and putting on hold all projects that are not related to critical services or infrastructure. I say NO to any new tax until I see that we are cutting back on things as well.
Posted by jayhawker (anonymous) on August 1, 2008 at 1:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)
create, et. al: I wish that I could share your optimism. I wrote on another thread about how the system of government favors the same people holding power year after year. That was no accident. Those folks know the rules and use them to their advantage. There is nothing illegal about it, but it's a fact. Here is why I think that the sales tax will pass: 1) They have convinced city leaders in all the small towns that this will help those communities. Of course, those communities will receive only crumbs, and the way the tax is collected and distributed, none of these communities will receive the windfall that they expect. 2) Most importantly, they scheduled the election simultaneously with a Primary Election, with little interest and low turnout. The turnout is the key. The lower the turnout, the more likely the tax is to pass. Why? Because, admittedly, the supporters of this tax are much more responsible about voting. That is exactly how the courthouse tax passed - after failing several times, they scheduled it for the election that would have the lowest possible turnout, and it passed (only by 200 votes). The point that I am making is that if turnout is low, and it probably will be, the tax will pass.
Post a comment
We allow registered users to post comments on this Web site. Our goal with this feature is to encourage thoughtful discussions about the news stories. Using the comment feature to make random attacks on people is not acceptable. Emporiagazette.com neither endorses nor guarantees the accuracy of any user contribution. Responsibility for what is posted or contributed to this site is the sole responsibility of each user. To learn more about our posting policies please read our User Poster Agreement Policy.
(Requires free registration.)