Red States, Including the ‘Newly-Reds,’ Excel at Job Growth
Now that state employment information for the first half of 2011 is available, one can’t help but notice which states are up, as well as a particularly telling example of one which is down.
Though admittedly the comparison isn’t apples to apples, it’s worth noting that of the 757,000 seasonally adjusted jobs added in the overall economy this year from January through June, the ten states with the highest percentage employment growth were responsible for well over half, or 390,000 of them, even though they only have about 20% of the nation’s population:
What’s more, as the economy by all accounts decelerated in May and June, the ten states above stayed relatively strong. While the country as a whole gained only 43,000 seasonally adjusted jobs in those two months, they added over 90,000. Democrats who accuse Republicans of wanting the economy to tank, please note: If it weren’t for these ten states, we might already be in the midst of another recession instead of possibly heading towards one, as Goldman Sachs and others have recently asserted.
Six of the ten (Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming) have been conservative strongholds for decades. Montana, though its governor and two senators are currently Democrats, has been a red state in all but one presidential election since 1972. The final three highlighted above — Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin — were previously governed by Democrats who were replaced with GOP governors this year. All three are in the early stages of what may be remarkable turnarounds. I call them “the newly-reds.”
Led by Governor John Kasich, Ohio’s January-June seasonally adjusted jobs pickup is the Buckeye State’s best performance since 1994. Not coincidentally, that’s about when then-Governor George Voinovich stopped being even sort of conservative. Regardless of the party in charge, Ohio was governed like a blue state until Kasich came along. Even more impressive, in terms of what has actually occurred (i.e., the not seasonally adjusted figures), the state has added just over 200,000 private-sector jobs in the past five months, the best February-June total since 1999, when the national economy, largely due to Kasich’s previous work on the federal budget as a congressman, was far stronger.
In March, Kasich and the General Assembly tentatively won a bitter battle with the state’s public-sector unions and passed “SB5.” As I noted several weeks ago, SB5 prohibits public employee strikes, limits the subjects of collective bargaining, requires public employees to pay 15% of their health insurance costs, and prohibits forced union “contributions” by nonunion public workers. In June, the governor signed a two-year budget which closed a projected $8 billion deficit dumped on the state by predecessor Ted Strickland without raising taxes and while keeping all-funds spending virtually flat. The Buckeye State reaped an almost immediate reward: Standard & Poor’s, which had downgraded the state’s debt rating just as Strickland departed in January, revised it to “stable” shortly after the budget’s passage.
The SB5 victory just noted is tentative because opponents have succeeded in getting a repeal initiative on the November ballot. It may not be an exaggeration to say that the state’s nascent recovery hangs in the balance.
Michigan’s performance is a bit less impressive, principally because it still has so far to go. Wolverine State employment contracted by over 600,000 on Democratic Governor Jennifer Granholm’s watch, so one shouldn’t be too impressed with the improvements achieved just yet. Nevertheless, Republican Rick Snyder, who succeeded Granholm, seems to have put a foundation in place for continued employment progress. In stark contrast to recent contentious budget battles, the state created an atmosphere of relative certainty by passing a budget four months ahead of time. Most notably, it features “a big reduction in business taxes,” which consumers end up paying anyway, and “an almost equal increase in income taxes.”
Then there’s Wisconsin. Has any state’s governor ever been vilified as severely and viciously as Scott Walker during his battle with the state’s public-sector unions earlier this year? Walker won’t get a thank-you card from them any time soon, but he should, because the alternative was massive government layoffs, most of which, as the Weekly Standard’s John McCormack has noted, have been avoided:
Walker’s budget repair bill, known as Act 10, is working just as he promised. To make up for a $2.8 billion deficit without raising taxes, state aid to school districts (the largest budget line) was reduced by $830 million. Act 10, Walker said, would give districts “the tools” needed to make up for the lost money as fairly as possible.
… Now that the law is in effect, where are the horror stories of massive layoffs and schools shutting down? They don’t exist — except in a couple of districts where collective bargaining agreements, inked before the budget repair bill was introduced, remain in effect.
McCormack goes on to explain that schools in Milwaukee and Kenosha have each laid off hundreds of teachers because those districts’ unions “cleverly” concluded contracts which avoided the employee health care and pension contributions contained in Walker’s budget repair bill. Teachers who have lost their jobs might be questioning union leaders’ “wisdom.” Meanwhile, the state’s employment pickup this year is more than triple that seen under Democrat Jim Doyle during all of 2010.
As to poorly performing states, the booby prize goes to Connecticut, which after eking out small early gains has lost 9,000 seasonally adjusted jobs in the past two months. Only a fool would believe that this result has nothing to do with Democratic Governor Dannel Malloy’s poor public policy choices since he took office this year.
Malloy pushed billions of dollars of tax increases through the Nutmeg State’s legislature with promises that he would rein in spending in negotiations with the state’s unions. Fat chance of that. As of when this column was written, the unions, in the midst of a 20-year contract expiring in 2017 (you read that right), still hadn’t budged, even though because of their intransigence Malloy had to lay off over 6,500 state employees earlier this month.
Imagine that. A Democratic Party politician promises he’ll rein in spending after he gets his “needed” tax increases, and then fails in his followthrough. We’ve heard that tune far too many times, including now from President Obama and Democrats in Washington. Far too often in the past, spendaholic Dems have been accompanied off the cliff by go-along, get-along Republicans. Governors Kasich, Snyder, and especially Walker have shown that the “newly-reds” have a better way.
With all due respect, I don’t see many states listed that are not within their ‘historical’ parameters of fluctuation, be they governed by democrats or republicans. Many of those are heavy energy and agricultural commodities states. Additionally, it would be interesting to see how many of those states increases are ‘pocketed’ within the state and how many are goods/mfg sector jobs vs. services sector jobs.
Sustainability, especially, in todays economic environment, is always a challenge for any states government regardless of political party.
And your point is that the fact that every single one of the 10 of the best states for jobs are red or “newly red” is pure coincidence? Do you happen to play poker? Can we arrange a high-stakes game? Please?
Really, TT? Within their historic ranges? Yes… at an ahistoric time! If you are making money like usual at a time when everyone else in your field is losing money, you are a freaking genius! This is a tremendous accomplishment! Do not poo-poo it.
Marc…several of the states listed are states in which we have had continuous operations in for (2) over 120 years and others over 75 years. Of those states, we have knowledge of when they were historically Democrat through the more recent times of switch-back controls by the parties. I think we have a very good idea of both the politics, their economies and jobs parameters in several of those states….and we’re not unknowns in those states to their governments.
“Sustainability, especially, in todays economic environment, is always a challenge for any states government regardless of political party.” That IS the problem. That it has become a PROBLEM for government is the actual problem. “(T)odays economic environment…” is the fault of government. The two do not mix. Government needs to butt out of the economy if we are to ever recover and achieve real “sustainability”. Why should an entity like “government”, that produces nothing, that drains vitality from the productive sector, have their hands around the throats of those that create wealth?
Okay have it your way! Now lets see if you Tea Party folks have the hanging brass to announce well before the 2012 date that you’re going to attempt to repeal the legislative authroization and appropriations authorizations for ALL 1,700 + government subsidies to states and the private sector economies.
I’m pretty sure I know the answer to such a proposition. All politcal rhetoric and durn sure NO hanging brass! Why? Because they know they would be hung by a few before the majority could get to them! Think I’m wrong on either conclusion? Try pushing your Tea Party comrades to repeal those 1,700 + subsidies.
You just don’t get it and I guess you never will…
Those 1700 subsidies should have never existed in the first place! Where does the constitution give the Federal Govt the right to provide those??? Right, it doesn’t.
The Federal Govt was created for National Security, period. It should have no other function. Every other right or law should belong to the States. That’s what makes us a Republic, which Ben Franklin said we needed to hold onto and we have obviously lost that grip because of people like you.
I would like to see a law put on the books NOW, to avoid a crash in the future.
I do not want to bail out Ney York, Illinois and california when(not if)they are bankrupt and I live in Illinois!
Therefore: The Federal Government shall NOT bail out any state that is in finantial trouble caused by mismanagement of funds. Mismanagement would include but is not limited to: 1. Excessive retirement funds and or benefits (those greater than the private sector). 2.Spending money on unnecessary transportation systems that cannot exist without Govt. funding (leave it to the private sector…If it cannot sustain itself, it cannot exist). 3. Using tax dollars for “expanding the arts” ( Where in the Constitution is this the responsibility of Government? Let the private sector do it on a voluntary basis). 4.(Using public funds to provide “public radio and television” which is just a way to send tax dollars to support one party’s views over another. If over 33% of the population has a different view, it CANNOT be funded by taxes.
“In March, Kasich and the General Assembly tentatively won a bitter battle with the state’s public-sector unions and passed “SB5.” As I noted several weeks ago, SB5 prohibits public employee strikes, limits the subjects of collective bargaining, requires public employees to pay 15% of their health insurance costs, and prohibits forced union “contributions” by nonunion public workers. In June, the governor signed a two-year budget which closed a projected $8 billion deficit dumped on the state by predecessor Ted Strickland without raising taxes and while keeping all-funds spending virtually flat. The Buckeye State reaped an almost immediate reward: Standard & Poor’s, which had downgraded the state’s debt rating just as Strickland departed in January, revised it to “stable” shortly after the budget’s passage.”
You’ll be seeing more and more of this around the country. States are becoming fed up with the union’s stranglehold on their economies and are throwing them out or, at the very least, cutting off most of their power. The same is happening in formerly Democratic strongholds like New Jersey and Wisconsin, and the states are seeing immediate results. People are finally seeing a correlation between huge state budget deficits and large union benefits and are taking steps to ends this. As a result, the Democratic parties in many of these states are taking a big hit, and it’s about time. It will be interesting to see how much power the unions will lose in the 2012 election. I think it will be a lot. And that will be good for Republicans and very good for the country.
Bleeding heart liberal blue states are bleeding their populations. Liberal policies have failed and left destruction, despair and little hope in their wake, as they always do. Obama’s liberal policies will eventually do the same thing to America unless he is defeated next year. People (even unemployed liberals) are fleeing to red states, where freedom, jobs and economic growth abound, as this article notes. How many lives, job & economies must be destroyed before people reject sure-to-fail liberal policy everywhere?
Downside to the blue-flight is that after the refugees get to sanctuary, they then vote in people who will create the same problems that they had in their old states.
See — Oregon, Carolinas, Florida
I know, it’s amazing! Stupid is as stupid does..
They just don’t learn. Hopefully, those of us with a brain can stop them in our States.
Lets not let this become a union – anti-umion issue. Let us acknowledge the right for all workers to collective bargaining with the limitation that it is a right, but should not be a condition of employment. The results of collective bargaining are often to the detriment of the workers. The UAW got sweetheart deals, and management looking the other way when workers got less and less productive. Result? Check out the nearest lot for Hondas, Nissans and Toyotas, and check out Detroit’s dismal streets or available manufacturing space here in Fenton, Missouri.
The public sector is much the same in that the negotiators across the table from the unions are as corrupt, perhaps even more spineless, then those of the Big Three who gave away the store to the UAW. So let us seek legislation that would require public sector contracts be put to the vote of the taxpayers, just as the UAW contracts and member behavior were put to the vote of the car buyer. Unions’ and management’s last best offers go on the ballot for a binding vote by the electorate. And, should we feel the politicians charged with representing us have made too generous an offer to the unions, we need only look down the ballot to find the opportunity to throw them out.
Its about public unions, not private.
Collective bargaining is also not a “right”. It is a power, one created by government.
Unions usually become militant. Power does that to folks. There are some good unions out there, but none of the public sector unions are any good.
As to the article, I’d like to see a Red Governor State versus Blue Governor State comparison. All the Reds versus all the Blues.
I agree with Marc that this problem is about public service unions. Unlike in the private sector, they can’t kill their host organisms because of (primarily) Democratic politicians who fight fiercely for taxes, fees, bonds and regulations that keep feeding union demands. It is easy to see why Obama had to intercede in the GM/UAW problem even if it meant trampling all over our legal and constitutional processes. The host was dying and UAW leaders were never going to admit that they were a root cause and alter their behavior.
The most galling part of all of this is that the only reason that these unions can get such high pay, benefits and early retirement while limiting their obligations to produce and perform is because the rest of us do not get these things. It is easy to see that if we all were able to demand the same exalted treatment, prices would go up, production would go down and any wage and benefit gains that we all got would be cancelled out. And since we are in a global economy, exports and jobs would be lost in droves.
Raising taxes on businesses is not the answer. It just increases prices and reduces global competitiveness. The wealthy “millionaires and billionaires” (according to Obama includes any family makes over $250,000) are not going to make up the difference. There are not enough of them and they are also are most prolific job creators.
So next time you come upon a public union protest, ignore their signs and slogans and understand that they are really demanding that the rest of us remain in the serfdom also known as the “American private sector middle class” so that they can hang on to their privileged lifestyles.
With all due respect to the comments on labor unions, I’m pretty sure there is NO shortage of litigation and the ultimate constitutional litigation before the Supreme Courts over the many years. Of course, should any entity of the federal government take serious, an initiative to legislate or independently regulation a national policy of circumventing states right-to-work constitutional rights on this issue, that will be another case ripe for constitutional litigation. One in which the federal government position would most certainly lose. The federal government is not a state and thus doesn’t have those states rights. Likewise, the courts, including the supreme court, has long ruled on limited labor union represention in the federal public sector.
Woo-hoo O-H-I-O
There are some fundamental rights issues concerning unions, freedom of association being the foundational issue.
The problem is that the rights of the employer are ignored. The employer’s right to freely associate or dissociate is trumped by the union. And the rights of employees not to join a union or not to contribute to political causes it does not support are also frustrated.
It is so basic, it makes me feel the that a classroom full of 6th graders could do a better job of running our country the we do. That is 6th graders from a couple generations ago. Thanks to our teachers unions we are turning children into dunces.
This has ALWAYS been my problem with unions – the legal exclusive powers they are given. You want to make a union among the workers? Fine! Knock yourself out!
If it’s valuable to them and/or you’re a good leader, all (or almost all) of them will join, and the employer will listen, because it is in their own best interest to do so (turning over your whole workforce is crazy… and you’ll end up having to do so again in the future if you don’t address the problems) – yay, freedom!
If you’re a lousy leader and/or what you are doing is not valuable to the workers (such as blowing all their union dues on political BS), they WON’T join, and the employer WON’T listen. Yay, freedom!
But under the current system, the employer is not allowed to simply hire other people – they MUST listen to the unions. And, in many cases, nobody “joins” the union, the union just gets their money whether they want in or not. How the crap is that supposed to benefit me? How is that different than any other government bureaucrat?
tom beebe st louis: “Let us acknowledge the right for all workers to collective bargaining with the limitation that it is a right, but should not be a condition of employment.”
Collective bargaining is not a right.
While some NGOs (the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Labor Organization Conventions for example) have declared ‘collective bargaining’ to be a right, that has no bearing whatsoever – legal or moral – on workers in the United States.
On the contrary, ‘collective bargaining’ is a privilege provided by legislation and may be modified and/or rescinded without harm to anyone’s individual Constitutionally protected rights. Under our right of free assembly/association, employees and employers both have rights as to whom they choose to, or not to, associate and assemble with – which includes workplaces.
My favorite quip along the lines of the article comes from Iowahawk’s list of questions for that ridiculous Obama Twitter Town Hall:
“When you create jobs, why do always create them for Texas?”
Classic!
I hope you don’t do medical research. One can’t establish causality unless you can prove it. Could the fact that these states are energy, agricultural ,or internationally-effective manufacturing states explain the data.
Absolutely! However – looks like the pro-business philosophy that allows them to be energy, agricultural, or internationally-effective manufacturing states is a function of them being red states. Blue states tend to kill these characteristics where they exist (via unions, oppressive environmental regulations and confiscatory taxiation).
What an arrogant thing to say. This isn’t a formal study, but it IS interesting- at least to the intellectually curious. Besides, economics is a bit like epidemiology, a field I would hope you’d have more than a passing familiarity with (well- at least they taught it in my medical school). It’s extremely rare to be able to control variables in either field- no one is going to do a double-blinded crossover study, sorry. Suffice it to say, having the ten top states in job growth tend to the conservative side is extremely unlikely based on random chance alone.
What I’d really like to see is what the bottom ten states are. Something tells me they might be deep-sea blue.
Columbus OH native and current resident here – part of why his numbers are bad is because of the SB5 bill. A lib group got over a million signatures in the bat of an eye to get it put on the ballot and be overturned. Likewise, a large gathering of conservative and libertarian groups took nearly a year to get half that amount of signatures for an amendment to the constitution banning the Obamacare mandate added to the same ballot. November should be interesting, with two hot button issues by two warring factions bringing people to the polls in an otherwise quiet election year.
I like Kasich, voted for him (really like our lieutenant gov as well, Taylor), but he’ll take a beating in the polls over SB5 for a while, I think. Big Union has a substantial presence here. There are registered Republicans that have come out against that bill. I know some who definitely don’t like it.
All good news except the fact that certain state policies work better than others never makes it into presidential elections. The federal elections are strictly about the use of federal power instead of the best way to govern overall. Therefore states are never held accountable for their performance and the electorate in blue states stay rather insulated. If political problems don’t become part of political discussions than articles like this become self-congratulation (for the red states at least) and not information.
Could it be that there are few illigales in these states, no money sucking freebies?
What those spoiled teachers and other blind and misguided union supporters did to Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker and the state Republican leadership there is disgusting and shameful. Imagine that Gov Scott was only trying to SAVE their jobs and SAVE his state from going under. They didn’t even give him chance, like the liberal establishment continue to give idiotic passes to liberal governors from blue states such as bankrupt California, which is going deeper in debt while also losing jobs and residents to other states due to high taxes, and soon to be, even higher taxes. It’s sick that Hollywood, Washington and New York elitist ignoramuses and the unions were quick to villify Gov Walker and cry recall and impeachment, distort the facts and create hate and discontent, when they should be applauding him for taking bold and courageous steps to fix what he inherited. Obama, if you want to emulate leadership, look to Gov Scott, who doesn’t waste time, reputation and credibility by blaming his predecessor. As soon as Gov Walker took office, he started LEADING and fixing problems he inherited. Give him and the other Republican governors well-deserved credit, for a change, America. Look to them for REAL leadership.
It is clear that getting government out of the way is good for the economy. But the Democrat Party is in the hands of statists who exist only to enhance their personal power and wealth. Thus statistics such as those above are ignored.
Greetings Fellow Americans:
What grieves me, make that galls me about the American economy,is that too many USA corporations are outsourcing American jobs to foreign countries. For example, my wife is a college degree major in accounting graduate,has been for 35 years with various companies throughoput the USA,has been employed by her Texas company employer for ten years and for this past year in their corporate headquarters, and how about these rotten apples? They recently outsourced her accounting job to Mexico. She had been with her Arlington, Texas headquartered employer for 11 years, and to my knowledge,received very favorable annual job performance evaluations. Lo and behold, they outsourced her accounting position to Mexico six months ago. Highly suspect this was a salary cost manuever. She was not making an enormous, annual salary($35,000)based on her 35+ years working as an accountant. Thank God my retirement income is keeping us afloat financially. Be alert gainfully employed employees. American corporations will let you go as an employee whenever/wherever they feel they can save a few dollars by outsourcing your corporate job position to a foreign country. Please be aware of your status with your employer regardless of how highly you are paid or your job level with your employer regardless of your high annual job evaluations. Be aware something doesn’t happen to you like what happened to my wife’s work position. Here is the name of her former,cuthroat employer – Professional Packaging, Inc.! Forewarned is forearmed!
Jimbo
Jimbo
So, where is this so-called “data” supposed to have come from?