January 26, 2010 05:15 AM
Webber: The State of the States
Governor Jay Nixon’s second State of the State speech shared the same main focus as many of his counterparts in other states: J-O-B-S. In part, that similarity is because the dismal state of the national economy, in part it is because state policy makers watch other states. It is surprising how many governors made pointed comparisons between their states and others (a source for all the State of the States speeches is www.stateline.org) and usually concluded “we have problems but are better off then many.”
Most governors have reduced the number of state employees and proposed cuts in government service. California, Florida, Michigan and Washington face what can truly be labeled a “crisis." Missouri, and most Midwestern states except our neighbor Illinois, are relatively better off due to our heritage of less government and greater insulation from the financial crisis of 2008.
The primary audience for a State of the State address is the state legislature, in this case controlled by Nixon’s opposite party. A second audience is the media who will boil the speech down and summarize it for the attentive public. Few citizens hear it for themselves. In that context, it understandable that Nixon would tout balancing the budget without raising taxes—it is unlikely he has a political feasible alternative—and leave program details to his budget.
While jobs and balancing the budgets have replaced health care and social issues as the trendy themes in state capitals, Nixon touched on other issues, including increasing K-12 education funding (but not to the fully funded level), helping veterans get jobs, assisting new home buyers, expanding broadband to all areas of the state, autism insurance coverage and legislative ethics reform.
The business incentive approach to job development espoused by most state governors has a flaw: it is a zero sum game. It makes little sense for Missouri to “incentivize” a business to relocate from Pennsylvania who attracts one from Indiana who entices one from Kansas who convinces a firm to move from Missouri. This is especially true when incentive packages include tax increment financing that affect local school, library and fire districts.
A well-focused jobs plan, like the governor’s Missouri Science and Innovation Reinvestment Act, may be worthwhile if it grows a new industry that reinforces other state education and governmental programs and that blossoms into spin-offs and new enterprises. A few years ago many states were chasing the biodiesel and biotechnology dream that seems to have faded.
Nixon’s mentioning two relative minor issues—regulating payday loans and creating a Missouri State Parks Youth Corps—were a surprising detail of his speech. Both are indirect consequences of the sluggish economy. The governor cited a 10-year decline in visits to Missouri’s parks. This can’t be good for tourism, rural development nor youth development.
While predominately forward looking, Nixon reminded the legislature that he reformed the license and registration fee offices contracting and that the legislature did not enact his health care. Health care received little attention this year, with Nixon referring to the national health care debate quickly stating “if that federal legislation passes, it’s our job to show steady, bipartisan leadership and maximize the benefits for the people of Missouri” thus sidestepping the Missouri House resolution opposing several healthcare bills now in Congress.
The State of the State speeches of the governors of Kansas, Kentucky, Indiana and Iowa, four Midwestern comparable states, are at first blush pretty much alike, but they are as different as each state’s basketball heritage.
Many governors are proposing reducing size of state government, or making it more efficient. Indiana governor asserts that state government workforce is lowest since 1982 and proclaims that it is the sixth smallest state government, while Kentucky’s governor seems to regret they gave fewest state employees in two decades. The Kansas governor expressed regrets saying “we are way beyond the point of cutting waste.”
In addition, a focus of Iowa Gov. Chet Culver (D) was I-Jobs, a bond program similar to Missouri state Representative Chris Kelly’s proposed Fifth State Building Fund. I-Jobs is broader in that it is controlled by local government officials for infrastructure projects.
Kentucky Gov. Steven L. Beshear's (D) said his first of four priority was “create and retain jobs” but second was “to help families survive this recession.” He detailed increases in unemployment insurance programs, increasing children’s health insurance, increasing the school dropout age, coordinating transfers among the states colleges, and reducing smoking to cut health care cost and improve worker productivity. Beshear presented a longer and a more specific social policy agenda than other governors.
Taken together, the State of the States speeches present a menu of policy ideas in this era of economic stagnation. Included are more effective state pension administration, more child support collection, reduced number of elections as a cost savings, outlawing social promotion, eliminating partisan gerrymandering, adopting state-wide smoking ban , more efficient property tax assessment, and four-day government work weeks.
I found no governor who proposed a regional or multi-state coordinated approach to establishing state sales taxes on internet sales, better coordination of interstate water and tax credit conflicts, nor proposals for maintaining states’ role in balancing national policymakers be it health care reform or a second federal stimulus. State governors face a similar set of economic challenges but they are largely on their own.
David Webber is Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Missouri, Columbia specializing in American public policy, federalism and state legislatures. His column appears every Tuesday.
It is surprising how many governors made pointed comparisons between their states and others and usually concluded “we have problems but are better off then many.”
Taken together, the State of the States speeches present a menu of policy ideas in this era of economic stagnation.
