- Pennsylvania Among 'Terrible 10' Most Regressive Tax States
- February 4 Non-Partisan Training: HOW TO RUN FOR ELECTION BOARD IN 2013: HOW TO RUN FOR COMMITTEEPERSON IN 2014
- Republican Governors Opt-In to Medicaid Expansion
- The Reports of Unions' Death Are Greatly Exaggerated
- Ask Allyson Schwartz to run for Governor
- Mind the gap: Opting Out of Medicaid Expansion Leaves Low-income Families Behind
- Jan. 14 Workshop:HOW TO RUN FOR ELECTION BOARD IN 2013; HOW TO RUN FOR COMMITTEEPERSON IN 2014
- Seth Williams on Guns, Jasmine Rivera on School Closures @PFC Meetup Wednesday
- PA Revenue Strong Midway Through Year; Tax Cut Could Have Big Impact
- What to Make of the Fiscal Cliff Deal?
By Stephen Herzenberg, Third and State
In the 1890s, scientist George Stratton reported that, after four days of wearing a lens that inverted his vision, his brain reprocessed what he saw and flipped everything back up the right way.
John Micek’s Friday article brought this experiment to mind. Micek quotes Pennsylvania House Speaker Sam Smith summing up the accomplishments of the House of Representatives in the 2011-12 legislative session: "We … focused on the economy and private-sector job creation." Majority Leader Mike Turzai echoed Smith saying: "We kept our commitments on fiscal responsibility and private-sector job-creation."
Let’s take a look at some actual job numbers.
Between January 2011 (the start of the current legislative session) and September 2012 (the latest data available), the number of private-sector jobs in Pennsylvania grew by 87,000, an increase of 1.8%. In this period, Pennsylvania ranked 31st out of the 50 states for private job growth by percentage. National private-sector job growth equaled 3%.
If you look at the last 12 months, from September 2011 to September 2012, Pennsylvania’s private-sector job ranking falls to 35th, with the state’s private-sector job growth equal to about half the national rate.
Now, compare that to job growth between January 2010 and January 2011, when the commonwealth ranked 12th among the 50 states with job growth of 1.8% (compared to the national rate of 1.3%).
By Mark Price, Third and State
On Monday night, the Lower Allen Township commissioners in Cumberland County considered a proposal from Ahold USA, the corporate parent of Giant Food Stores, for a $400,000 property tax abatement on a meat repackaging plant on which the company has already broken ground. (Ahold USA is itself the subsidiary of the Netherlands-based Ahold.)
The company has neglected a basic principle of the economic development game through which companies extract subsidies and tax breaks from states and localities where they were going to build anyway: until you have the subsidy in hand, don't give away that it will not impact your location decision.
But since the company made this error, the title of this blog post, taken from the Austin Powers movie Goldmember, should suffice for the township's answer. (It is pure coincidence that Goldmember, a Dutchman pictured to the right, has a gold G on his velvet sweatsuit.)
Here are two stories on this issue.
- Roger Quigley, Patriot-News — Lower Allen Township commissioners delay decision on tax-relief request
- Jim T. Ryan, Central Penn Business Journal — Lower Allen delays LERTA decision for Giant/Ahold facility
The Lower Allen commissioners should continue to say no to Ahold's request because it is a simple giveaway that diverts needed tax revenue from the township. It would be that much costlier if the West Shore School District (which has absorbed $2.2 million in state budget cuts since 2010-11) and Cumberland County (where property taxes for most homeowners and businesses may rise by 22% next year) follow suit.
The repackaging plant will consolidate meat cutting operations for Ahold USA's stores in the mid-Atlantic region. Customers will no longer get their meat freshly cut in the store, instead, the meat cutting and packaging function is being moved to a central location with easy access to the interstate. Some meat cutters will lose their jobs in the process, while others might be offered jobs at the new facility, at a lower wage.
For its $400,000, Lower Allen Township is being promised between 450 and 800 jobs; there is no word on how many jobs will be lost at Giant Food Stores in the region or at the company's Maryland division.
Normally, a corporate giant like Ahold will approach government officials to inform them they are on the short list for a new facility being planned. Just look at how the Shell Corporation enticed incentive offers from Ohio and West Virginia before securing the mother lode of all incentives from Pennsylvania (a $1.67 billion, 25-year tax break).
Unfortunately for Ahold USA, the company has already broken ground on the meat repackaging plant. So the township commissioners made the right move by putting the request on hold. Why divert scarce tax dollars to a profitable corporation to do something they are already doing anyway?
While they make good beer in the Netherlands, Ahold corporate honchos could learn a thing or two about economic development blackmail from Dick Yuengling Jr., the owner and president of D.G. Yuengling & Son’s.
Although the company recently expanded distribution in Ohio, making Western Pennsylvania an economically attractive location to expand production, the brewing scion doubts he would build a new brewery in Pennsylvania. Yuengling wasn't specific about what he means by business climate, but it is pretty clear from a Patriot-News interview that he doesn't think Pennsylvania as a rule offers enough taxpayer cash to corporations. (Although, Yuengling says his decision of where to build will not be based on the incentives offered.)
- John Luciew, Patriot-News — Yuengling, now the largest American-owned brewer, says it likely won't build its next brewery in Pennsylvania for business reasons:
The decision comes down to taxes, incentives and the state’s business climate, Yuengling said.
In the interview, Yuengling hinted that there are far more business-friendly states. And while he didn’t directly criticize any Pennsylvania administration, past or present, he said he can never be certain which way the state is leaning in terms of its tax and business policies.
By contrast, he said enticing incentives offered by other states might be too good to pass up. However, he declined to cite any states he might be considering for the brewery...
“We don’t necessarily base business decisions on incentives like that. But if they are going to give them to somebody, we would stand there and take them.”
By Stephen Herzenberg, Third and State
The Corbett administration has a new summary of Pennsylvania's recent job performance. Today's news that Pennsylvania's unemployment rate is as high as the national unemployment rate underscores, however, that the state's recent jobs record is not good. Let’s take a closer look.
PA vs. U.S.: The Corbett jobs summary notes that Pennsylvania's unemployment rate is below the national rate — and it was when the summary was first released. This was not a new trend: the Pennsylvania rate was a point or a point-and-a-half below the national rate for most of the four years before Governor Corbett took office. A year ago, the gap between the Pennsylvania and U.S. unemployment rate was still statistically significant. (See Table A.) But the gap between the two rates — the "Pennsylvania advantage" — has been shrinking steadily since 2010 until the Pennsylvania rate finally climbed to the U.S. level in August 2012, both equaling 8.1%.
Private-sector Job Growth: While the administration touts private-sector job growth in 2011, the numbers reflect a national trend, rather than a unique Pennsylvania story.
The U.S. economy has had 30 consecutive months of private-sector job growth. In fact, Pennsylvania's rank for the percent growth in private-sector job growth has fallen from 8th in 2010 to 36th in the 12 months ending in July 2012. One of the reasons that Pennsylvania's private-sector job-growth ranking is down is the deeper cuts in public employment in Pennsylvania compared to other states. Deep cuts to Pennsylvania public schools and colleges led to a loss of 14,000 education jobs alone in 2011.
These layoffs impact the classroom and Main Street too. Unemployed teachers, like unemployed factory workers, don’t have money to spend, which affects the broader economy.
Manufacturing Job Growth: Manufacturing jobs growth improved in 2011, but again reflects national trends. In fact, Pennsylvania's manufacturing job growth since early 2010 is slightly below half the national increase. (See The State of Working Pennsylvania 2012.)
New Hires in Marcellus Shale: Not this one again. The administration is touting natural gas industry growth by citing the number of new hires. As we've explained repeatedly, new hires are not new jobs (most new hires replace people who quit or are fired). In fact, the number of new hires is basically a meaningless number. Statewide there were 580,400 new hires during the 2nd quarter in Pennsylvania, while total non-farm employment rose between the 1st and 2nd quarter by less than 300 jobs. In other words, the only reason to cite new hires is to make the job gain seem substantially larger than it really is.
The gas industry has led to some job growth in Pennsylvania, just not on the scale claimed by the industry. Between the 4th quarter of 2008 and the 4th quarter of 2011, employment in the core Marcellus Shale industries grew by 18,000. That gain was largely wiped out by the loss of 14,000 education jobs in just one year. Even using the most generous estimates, employment in the Marcellus Shale in direct and ancillary industries in the 4th quarter of 2011 (as published by the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and industry) was 238,400 – about 4.2% of total state employment.
Here's the unsolicited advice: Twenty months into Governor Corbett's first term, there is still time for the Governor to pursue policies that will improve Pennsylvania's job performance. There are multiple options that have strong bipartisan and business support. For example, investing in transportation infrastructure as recommended by the Governor's own transportation commission.
In manufacturing and workforce development, the administration is also saying some of the right things. But talk is cheap: we need actual investment in skills and innovation if our job performance is going to improve relative to other states and the nation.
By Mark Price, Third and State
Labor Day 2012 is behind us, but the challenges confronting the middle class are not.
As we do each year around this time, the Keystone Research Center has released the State of Working Pennsylvania. My co-author, a.k.a El Jefe, had a Labor Day op-ed in the Harrisburg Patriot-News where he laid out the theme of this year's report — namely, that the middle class in Pennsylvania and the U.S. cannot afford another lost decade.
The next three figures lay out the major elements of this year's State of Working Pennsylvania: employment growth over the last decade has been weak (Figure 1.10); as a result, incomes over the last decade declined (Figure 1.11); and in the first year of the recovery and of the new decade, income inequality resumed its growth as the top 1% increased their share of all income (Figure 5.1).
With job growth weak and many policymakers advocating that we lay off more teachers and continue to put off needed investments in infrastructure, we are very concerned that working and middle-class families may end the next decade with less income from work than they started with in 2010.
By Mark Price, Third and State
Pennsylvania's unemployment rate shot up three-tenths of a point in July to 7.9%. Just two months before in May, the rate was 7.4%. Total nonfarm jobs in the state were down 3,100 in July.
That's not all. There was a big revision downward with the state's nonfarm payroll count for June: it was originally reported as 5,729,700, but was revised down by 17,400. To put it in some perspective: Pennsylvania reported a June jobs gain in its report last month of 14,600 jobs. After the latest revisions, Pennsylvania actually lost 2,800 jobs in June.
Industry-wise, the July report is a mixed bag. Mining; trade, transportation & utilities; information; professional & business services; and other services saw gains. Constructions; manufacturing; financial activities; education & health services; leisure & hospitality; and government saw losses.
Overall, July was not a good month for the labor market in Pennsylvania, with employment falling in both the household (-10,000) and establishment (-3,100) surveys, and, of course, with the unemployment rate rising to just shy of 8% and shamefully close to the national unemployment rate of 8.3%.
I say shamefully because Pennsylvania weathered this recession better than most states and early in the recovery posted strong job gains. The Pennsylvania advantage coming out of the recession is being slowly whittled away by the persistent loss of public-sector jobs, mostly in local school districts, that has followed deep cuts in state funding.
I wouldn't panic over these numbers; there is no reason to believe the Pennsylvania or national economy are headed into a recession. Growth just remains disappointingly weak and will likely remain so through the end of the year.
By Sharon Ward, Third and State
Governor Tom Corbett's May 21 newsletter offered up responses to five "myths" the administration claims are circulating about his proposed budget for next year. The Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center examined these myths and the myths behind the myths to give you a clear picture about what is fact and what is fiction in Harrisburg.
Governor's Myth #1: Pennsylvania spends more money building prisons than building schools.
We’re not sure where this one came from, but we will give it a whirl.
Fact: The Corbett administration’s budget includes a moratorium on new school construction projections, and NO FUNDING for school district projects in the pipeline.
Fact: If the Governor’s proposed plan for higher education is adopted, Pennsylvania will spend twice as much on prisons as it does on colleges. In 2009-10, the state's corrections budget was $1.8 billion and college funding was $1.5 billion. If the Governor had his way, Pennsylvania would spend $1.9 billion on corrections and $980 million on colleges in 2012-13.
Fact: It costs the state much more to house prisoners than it does to educate a child. In 2011-12, Pennsylvania will house 49,000 inmates at a cost of $35,188 per inmate and spend $9.3 billion to educate 1.8 million students at a cost in state dollars of $5,305 per child.
Fact: It is better to build schools than to build prisons.
Governor's Myth #2: The reductions in higher education funding will cause universities to raise tuition.
By Mark Price, Third and State
Happy Sunny Friday, people! Now for the not so good news. The job numbers for Pennsylvania came out Thursday, and the overall picture was somewhat disappointing. The unemployment rate edged down slightly to 7.4% and nonfarm payrolls declined by 600 jobs. Focusing on the jobs data, the biggest loser in April was construction, which shed an eye-popping 5,400 jobs. That is a big swing at a time of year when construction projects should be ramping up. Odds are that loss is driven by sampling error rather than real trends in construction activity. Another troubling stat was the loss of 1,700 jobs in the public sector.
Because monthly data are somewhat erratic, you shouldn't make too much out of any one-month change in employment overall or within a sector. Looking at nonfarm payrolls since October, the jobs picture is somewhat brighter with Pennsylvania adding, on average, 3,900 jobs a month. So Pennsylvania's labor market, like the national labor market, is continuing to recover.
Now for the bad news: if you were hoping the Pennsylvania economy would finally return to full employment by 2015 (remember, the recession started in December 2007), nonfarm payrolls need to grow by about 10,000 jobs a month. So by that metric, we are a long way from fully recovering from the worst recession since the Great Depression.
By Mark Price, Third and State
Room 148 of the State Capitol might as well double as a Capitol broom closet. That's where the House Consumer Affairs Committee this morning rushed out amendments to House Bill 2191, which legalizes predatory payday lending in Pennsylvania.
The amendments to HB 2191 were misleadingly pitched as adding more consumer protections to the bill. Even the Navy Marine Corps Relief Society took a look at these amendments and said they do "nothing to mitigate the already harmful aspects of HB 2191," and that one amendment "actually worsens the problem it claims to solve."
One focus of the amendments this morning was language banning renewals or rollovers of a payday loan, as if that was a solution to stopping the long-term cycle of debt. It is not.
By Mark Price, Third and State
The Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry released new data for March on Pennsylvania's employment situation. According to the household survey, the unemployment rate edged down slightly to 7.5%, and the survey of employers showed healthy growth in nonfarm payrolls of 7,800 jobs.
As always, caution should be exercised in interpreting a month change in employment statistics.
In terms of levels, there were big gains in Leisure and Hospitality (7,000), Trade Transportation and Utilities (4,000) and Manufacturing (2,100). We will not have full information until the fall whether the job losses in the public sector will put a drag on employment growth in 2012, but the March data shows we are off to an uncomfortable start, with 2,500 jobs lost.
Over the last several months, Pennsylvania nonfarm payroll counts have been particularly volatile, showing big one-month gains and losses thanks to a combination of unusually warm weather and some technical issues. On average over the last six months, Pennsylvania has added just under 6,000 jobs a month. We need about 10,000 jobs a month to move back to full employment by March 2015 (three years from now).
While unemployment remains high today and for the foreseeable future, the distance between CEO pay and the pay of the typical worker reached an all time high in 2011.
By Stephen Herzenberg, Third and State
I've got an idea: let's employ low-wage, low-skill, and sometime out-of-state workers on small and medium-sized state-funded construction projects, with no benefit to taxpayers and negative impacts on local economies.
Sound like a stupid idea? That's because it is.
Here's the backdrop: Pennsylvania's prevailing wage law requires that workers on state-funded construction projects be paid a wage in line with what most other workers in their trade are paid within a certain geographical area.
Research in peer-refereed academic publications shows that the law could be called the quality construction law because it helps ensure the use of skilled workers on state projects. Where prevailing wage laws exist, training investment, worker experience, wages, benefits, and safety levels are all higher than where these laws do not exist.
Overall construction costs are the same with or without prevailing wage laws. The prevailing wage law, however, makes it impossible for contractors that employ low-wage, out-of-state workers to win bids on state projects: it ensures that jobs go to local workers, who spend their money at local businesses.
More middle-class jobs, stronger local economies, higher quality construction, no cost to taxpayers: what's not to like?
Unfortunately, some members of the Pennsylvania Legislature seem unwilling to leave well enough alone. Through House Bill 1329, these lawmakers want to make the prevailing wage law to apply to less state-funded construction work. How so? By exempting projects of less than $185,000 from prevailing wage standards. Currently, the law applies to all state-funded projects of $25,000 or higher.
In the first two posts of this series, I explained why the numbers being tossed around by advocates of repealing prevailing wage don’t add up. I explained that the claims of cost-savings are not based on any actual experience and that they represent the result of laughable hypothetical, or “what if,” calculations.
This leads to the most important point that the Pennsylvania School Boards Association, the Pennsylvania State Association of Boroughs, the Harrisburg Patriot-News Editorial Board and others keep missing: we can do much better than a hypothetical when assessing the impact of prevailing wage laws.
There is a body of research that examines construction costs (and other construction outcomes, like safety, training investment, wages, benefits, etc.) in states with and without prevailing wage laws as well as in states that eliminated prevailing wage laws. We don’t have to conjecture what “might” happen: we can look at what did happen. The preponderance of the evidence shows that prevailing wage laws do not raise construction costs.
Back in the late 1990s, Pennsylvania actually ran this real-world experiment itself — we lowered our prevailing wage levels, particularly in rural areas. That means we can look at what happened to construction costs. What happened is the same thing that has happened in other places — lower prevailing wages did not translate into lower construction costs.
The overwhelming weight of evidence based on the actual cost of public construction projects shows that prevailing wage laws do not raise costs. Therefore, advocates of repealing the law in Pennsylvania ignore this evidence. Instead of “evidence-based policy,” we have “lack-of-evidence-based policy.” Go figure.
Repeal advocates use a hypothetical calculation that makes assumptions about cost, rather than empirically examining the relationship between higher wages and total construction costs. (As discussed here, even these hypothetical cost estimates don’t make sense once you apply real world data to how much labor costs represent of total construction cost.)
Another key ingredient in the hypothetical calculations used by proponents of repeal is the claim made most recently by the Pennsylvania State Association of Boroughs (PSAB) that “the prevailing wage is 30 percent to 60 percent higher than the average wage for the same occupation.”
Part One of a Three-part Series on Prevailing Wage by Mark Price and originally published at Third and State.
Prevailing wage laws have long operated nationally and in states as a check against the tendency of the construction industry to degenerate into destructive wage and price competition. Such competition can drive skilled and experienced workers from the industry, reduce productivity and quality, and lead to poverty-level jobs, all without saving construction customers any money.
In an exhaustive review of the research on the impact of prevailing wages on contracting costs, Nooshin Mahalia concluded:
At this point in the evolution of the literature on the effect of prevailing wage regulations on government contract costs, the weight of the evidence is strongly on the side that there is no adverse impact. Almost all of the studies that have found otherwise use hypothetical models that fail to empirically address the question at hand. Moreover, the studies that have incorporated the full benefits of higher wages in public construction suggest that there are, in fact, substantial, calculable, positive benefits of prevailing wage laws.
Although the weight of evidence suggests prevailing wage laws do not raise costs, advocates for repealing the law in Pennsylvania continue to repeat some version of the following:
A blog post by Mark Price, originally published at Third and State.
Pennsylvania’s 2011-12 General Fund budget made deep cuts to education and health care while leaving unspent $620 million from a revenue surplus last year and other unused funds.
We have estimated the failure to spend that revenue will by itself translate into the loss of 17,714 jobs (including private jobs lost due to the ripple effects of public job cuts) over the course of the 2011-12 fiscal year.
So it is no surprise that Pennsylvania's job growth slowed in 2011 compared to 2010 and when compared to most other states.
On Wednesday, Governor Tom Corbett resumed his business tour to pitch his 2012-13 budget, which offers another round of budget cuts for the coming fiscal year.
The Campaign for What Works has a great video illustrating the interconnectedness of the investments our state makes in a variety of areas from early childhood education to public transportation to workforce training. These investments not only improve the quality of life of Pennsylvanians but create jobs and build a stronger economy.
As the campaign says on its home page: "Pennsylvania works when our state budget supports what works."
Take a minute to watch the video and pass it on.