Economic progress
Published July 20, 2014
by Chris Fitzsimon, NC Policy Watch and NC SPIN panelist, published in Greenville Daily Reflector, July 19, 2014.
One of the more hopeful signs in the troubling political debate in North Carolina these days comes not from the finger-pointing budget dispute in Raleigh but from Mount Airy of all places — at a meeting of the local Rotary club there last week.
N.C. Commerce Secretary Sharon Decker was the guest speaker and according to the Mount Airy News, she told the audience that there were five core parts of economic progress necessary for growth — “superior medical facilities; successful educational facilities; incentives conducive to attracting new businesses; balanced offerings in the areas of arts, tourism and culture; and a high quality of life in the community.”
Putting controversial incentives aside, that’s not a bad list and it is also notable for what is not on it. Decker did not mention taxes or regulations or unemployment insurance cuts or any of the other talking points that we usually hear from anti-government conservatives about the way to create jobs in North Carolina.
Instead, Decker’s approach can be summarized in one word — investments, that we need to make more strategic investments in health care, education and job training, the arts, and improving our quality of life if we are serious about creating jobs and a having a growing and prosperous state.
But state lawmakers have been doing just the opposite in recent years, slashing budgets for education at all levels, firing teacher assistants, leaving schools without textbooks and universities with fewer classes and higher tuition.
State leaders have demonized Medicaid and refused to expand it, leaving hundreds of thousands of people without health care while also considering kicking vulnerable people off the program who are currently on it. Support for the UNC’s flagship medical school and cancer center has been reduced.
Clean air and water and open public spaces are essential elements of a high quality of life but environmental protections have been severely weakened. There’s been some lip service about the role of the arts but there have been no new bold investments to back it up.
That sad state of affairs continues in the current back and forth between House and Senate leaders trying to come up with a final budget agreement. The two sides are stalemated over how big of a raise to give teachers and what to cut to pay for it.
Teachers certainly deserve a significant salary increase but not — as the Senate proposes — at the expense of firing thousands of teacher assistants and kicking people with dementia off of Medicaid and into street.
At least House leaders and Gov. Pat and McCrory are standing up to those ridiculous suggestions. But the budget legislative leaders passed last summer that McCrory enthusiastically signed slashed funding for 3,800 teacher assistants and 5,200 teachers, all to pay for a massive tax cut that went primarily to the wealthy and large corporations.
Simply standing up against another round of what even House Speaker Thom Tillis calls draconian cuts isn’t enough. It’s time to rethink the priorities in Raleigh, to repeal the next round of tax breaks set to take effect January 1.
That could end this budget dispute by freeing up revenue to give teachers a raise without firing anybody or kicking anyone off of Medicaid.
Then before next session, lawmakers and Governor McCrory could get together and work on a new plan for creating jobs and an era of true economic prosperity. It shouldn’t be hard for McCrory to find one.
His commerce secretary seems to have a list handy — investing in education, health care, quality of life, etc.
Growth and prosperity don’t come from slashing and burning. It takes investing and building. That seemed to be the message for the Mount Airy Rotary Club. The rest of the state needs to hear it too.
http://www.reflector.com/opinion/fitzsimon/fitzsimon-economic-progress-2540271
July 20, 2014 at 9:55 am
Richard Bunce says:
Ms. Decker big government views are simply just her views and not carved in stone tablets down from the Mount.
The incentives we need to attract business is lower taxes and regulations for all business not targeted incentives for political party favored businesses in exchange for campaign donations.
If she wants excellent schools she should be a big fan of vouchers for relatively low income parents to send their children to alternate school systems like relatively high income parents already do.
Arts, tourism, culture are not the perview of government...
July 20, 2014 at 11:31 pm
Norm Kelly says:
As usual, Chris completely misses the point. Example: 'Decker did not mention taxes or regulations or unemployment insurance cuts or any of the other talking points that we usually hear from anti-government conservatives about the way to create jobs in North Carolina'. Decker said exactly that. Let me show you what she said and the point that our friendly leftie obviously missed. I will quote Miss Decker from this post 'incentives conducive to attracting new businesses'. What Decker said was that businesses need to have incentive to move here. Not just some businesses, the chosen few, but businesses in general. The state can not afford the lib scheme of incentives. What conservatives mean by incentives is fair & equitable tax code, fair & equitable regulation, common-sense regulation that allows business to prosper without being over-burdensome. What libs, and apparently Chris, mean by incentives is to violate the existing tax code for a specific favored company by paying them to move here. Which method is more sustainable and more fair? The lib scheme of buying off businesses, what is called a bribe when it's done in the private sector? The lib scheme that is unsustainable and penalizes other people to provide a benefit to the chosen few? Or the conservative plan that creates an actual level playing field for all participants. The conservative plan that doesn't call for the government at any level to payoff some business to expand or move here. The conservative plan that is actually sustainable. A plan that relies on common sense, or a scheme that relies on ignorance on the part of the governed.
'that we need to make more strategic investments in health care, education and job training'. Isn't it the responsibility of private sector businesses to be making these type of investments? When government spends money, libs like to refer to it as an investment. Almost every time though it's actually just an expenditure. There is rarely if ever an investment when it comes to government spending. I know someone will come up with an example, but it's a rarity, not the norm. Health care investment comes from doctors and hospitals investing in buildings, equipment, research to improve peoples lives. With the intent of getting a return on their investment. Something libs despise. Job training is best handled by private business as well. Sometimes it's called 'intern', sometimes it's 'apprentice', but it always happens when an unskilled person is hired for a specific purpose and gets on the job training. Government job training programs propagate like germs in a petri dish, and usually don't turn out people with the skills any private business is looking for. As for education, what's wrong with a little competition? Why are libs, and school administrations (usually libs also!), so afraid of a little competition? Are libs concerned that private schools could actually prove that it's possible to educate kids who can actually think for themselves, develop critical thinking skills without being indoctrinated into the lib mind-set? Perhaps making a strategic investment in allowing parents to choose their kids school would be more advantageous, strategic, than continuously pouring more and more and more and more money into the public education behemoth. Why is it with libs that the answer to every question is 'more money'? When was the last time ANY LIB said that spending $12-15 THOUSAND per student was enough? Ask your friendly neighborhood lib what level of spending on big education would actually be considered enough. I guarantee you will get a very confused and confusing answer. The answer will probably include some misinformation about money not being the only answer. Which is contrary to every point made by libs when it concerns the education establishment. Chris is actually right, but not for the reasons he thinks. He is right that it's time government started making more strategic spending decisions. It's the lib schemes that always seem to fail so wonderfully that tax payers are concerned about. Remember when Gov Mike stole money from the E911 fund to pay for general fund expenses? Remember when Gov Mike stole money from the county sales tax fund to pay for ? Remember when the state purchased a lake-rated ferry to transport kids from the outer banks to schools on the mainland, over the ocean? This is what is called misguided, inappropriate, and non-strategic spending. We don't care about 'investment' when it comes to government. We care about strategic spending. A concept that appears foreign to libs. And too many pols.
'Clean air and water and open public spaces are essential elements of a high quality of life but environmental protections have been severely weakened'. Let's talk about environmental protections that have been severely weakened, but let's do it the opposite way libs typically want to do it. Let's do it honestly. How long ago did the Duke Power coal ash ponds start? According to articles even in the N&D, this situation has been ongoing for decades. How long have Republicans controlled Raleigh? 3 years? Compare 3 years to decades. Even when libs fail elementary math because they didn't have Communist Core, it's common sense that 3 years is shorter by a long shot than decades. Which environmental protections are we talking Chris? The libs, your allies, were in power when the coal ash ponds were created and not monitored, and known to be leaking. Is this the kind of environmental protection that we should be looking to 'go back' to? Typical lib, we can ignore the existing law but we need to create some new laws & regulations cuz that will really help the situation. At least it will look like we are doing something so our constituents will re-elect us. We don't really have to do anything to get re-elected so long as it LOOKS like we are doing something! Conservatives are tired of being lied to. We are tired of our elected officials getting paid significant amounts of money for NOT doing their job. The river(s)where the coal ash ponds leaked into, are they clean and usable? What protections can you specifically point to that have been weakened? When you answer this question, please compare these weakened regulations with the tough regulations that the libs made sure were followed concerning the coal ash ponds. We need to be able to compare apples to apples here so we can draw our own conclusions. Not half truths. Not N&D editorial kind of information, but facts & figures, please.
'It takes investing and building'. An excellent conclusion, Chris. So on the mark, it's hard to believe the source. The problem is your concept of investing and building versus what it really takes. Government spending doesn't happen until the government steals money from the private sector. Then the spending only happens after the stolen money is filtered through the hands of bureaucrats throughout the entire system. Private sector invests in the future. Private business builds new facilities. Private businesses build new homes. Private businesses renovate and reinvigorate existing structures. Private businesses don't do id10tic things like maintain a water tower, that is no longer being used, because it has sentimental value. Not at a time when the owner of the water tower has budget issues to deal with. One sure fire way to help the bottom line of a budget is to stop the bleeding wherever you can. Spending money to maintain, renovate, whatever a useless water tower because it 'looks good' and makes people 'feel good' is pointless. It does not contribute to a high quality of living in the area. It causes the community to spend money foolishly. It's an expense NOT an investment. Certainly not a strategic investment. Similar to the town owned movie theater. Not a strategic investment, just spending.
