RI – What Went Wrong: Tax Cuts for the Affluent


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

In the previous installment I discussed the devastation wrought by massive austerity, which was the principle cause of Rhode Island’s terrible jobs picture.  The traditional justification from austerity apologists is that those public sector cuts were necessary, and Rhode Island was forced to make those layoffs. Of course, this argument makes no sense in Rhode Island not just because the cutbacks began before the second Bush recession but also because the government found the money for a huge income tax cut for the rich, cutting the top rate from 9.9% to 5.99%.  This brings me to the subject of today’s column: taxes.

As I noted in the first column, the bottom fell out of the Rhode Island economy in late 2007, nearly a year before the second Bush recession began. Perhaps it is just a curious coincidence that this happened as the effect of the income tax cuts for the wealthy passed in 2006 began to kick in, but I suspect not.  Indeed, there is considerable evidence that it was these tax cuts that triggered the collapse of our economy.

The details of the tax cuts are slightly complicated. The original tax cut passed in 2006 and imposed an alternate flat tax rate that you could choose to pay instead of the traditional tax brackets. This rate started at 8% and fell by 0.5 percentage per year, hitting 6% in 2010, but in 2010, the government overhauled the tax code again in a tax cut aimed primarily at the upper middle class. You can see the three different rate schemes in the graph below.

Rhode Island tax rates before the 2006 flat tax, the rates after the flat tax (the flat tax, which decreased from 8% in 2006 to 6% in 2010, is shown with the 2010 6% rate), and the current tax rates.

Perhaps the most troubling aspect of these tax cuts is that they were pushed largely by Democrats, an act of conservatism that elated the Wall St. Journal’s editorial board.  Although they are often called the Carcieri tax cuts, and he vigorously supported them, much of the impetus came from General Assembly Democrats like Speaker of the House William Murphy (D-West Warwick) and Majority Leader Gordon Fox (D-Providence).  Fox predicted that “this new tax rate, as it did in Massachusetts, is certain to create new jobs, spur economic development, put money back in taxpayers’ pockets, and otherwise bring Rhode Island to a position of twenty-first century economic leadership in the region and, indeed, in the country.”  To say that did not happen is a severe understatement.

Income tax cuts for the wealthy at the national level provide mild, if inefficient, stimulus for the economy because they are offset by increasing the national debt. (Of course, there are much better ways to spend our nation’s money.) At the state level, however, it’s a different story. Because state taxes are deductible from national taxes, which tax the wealthy at a higher marginal rate, state level income tax cuts for the wealthy result in increasing national income taxes. The tax cuts also made it harder for Rhode Island to capture revenue from Rhode Island residents who have income in other states. Because so many wealthy Rhode Islanders work in Massachusetts, this is a serious issue. States can only tax out of state income if their tax rate is higher than the tax rate in the other state. So lowering Rhode Island’s income tax rate for the wealthy results in Rhode Island collecting less revenue from other states and other states collecting more revenue from Rhode Island, on top of sending more taxes to Washington. The net result is a considerable flow of capital out of the state, which is not good for the economy.

The real devastation from income tax cuts for the rich, though, comes from the spending cuts and property tax hikes that offset them.  The previous section discussed the spending cuts, and how they accelerated after the tax cuts.  The next section deals with the property tax hikes.

RI – What Went Wrong: Austerity’s Effects


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

I ended my previous post on a promise to dig into the mechanics of how Carcieri orchestrated the downfall of the Rhode Island economy. Naturally, we begin with something Carcieri took great pride in—laying off huge numbers of public sector workers. To show just how severe the public sector cutbacks were under Carcieri, I’ve plotted the Ocean State’s public sector workforce alongside the national numbers since 2000. (Both are normalized to 100 at January 2000.)

Before Carcieri’s cuts began to bite, Rhode Island public employment tracked the national numbers fairly closely, but once his policies were in place, Rhode Island’s public sector decoupled from the national public sector and took a precipitous nosedive. The bleeding has continued ever since. The pace of the widening of the gap accelerated in late 2006 after the passage of the 2006 budget, with its infamous tax cuts for the rich, but things didn’t end there. Even though public employment began falling all around the country in the aftermath of the recession, we still lost 7.75% of state and local public sector employees between January of 2008 and April of 2012—the second highest drop in the nation.

In conservative junk economics, laying off those greedy public sector workers is always a great idea, but of course, in the real world those layoffs can have devastating effects on the economy. To begin with, the jobs lost in the public sector are themselves jobs the Rhode Island economy has lost. If public employment in Rhode Island had followed the same trajectory as it did in the nation since 2000, we would have almost 9,000 more jobs in the public sector than we do now, and the unemployment rate would be 1.6 percentage points lower. Roughly half of our unemployment gap is the direct result of mass layoffs in the public sector.

The devastation caused by public sector layoffs does not end there. When public workers are laid off, their finances are devastated, and they start spending much less, driving down the demand for goods and services in Rhode Island. They also don’t have the money to buy new houses and can often wind up in foreclosure, which has devastating effects on the housing market. Rhode Island also ceases to benefit from the work that the public sector workers used to do. As Scott MacKay notes, Carcieri oversaw a general breakdown of government services that Chafee has spent much of his term in office trying to clean up.

Everyone has their favorite story of mistreatment at the hands of our government, but mine is the angry letter I received accusing me of not paying my state income tax. When I called up to protest that Rhode Island had already removed the money from my bank account, the woman I finally reached explained to me that they didn’t really have the staff to check whether everyone they were sending these letters to actually hadn’t paid their taxes.

Estimating the magnitude of the collateral damage from Rhode Island’s public sector mass layoffs is difficult, but it is probably fair to say that does not explain all of the rest of the unemployment gap between Rhode Island and the U.S. average. Part of the rest comes from other public sector cuts, many of which were far more savage than the national average. Pensions cuts, stagnant wages, and reduced morale most likely took their toll by reducing demand, but these cuts happened in other states as well, and much of the pain is spread out over several decades, so it remains unclear how much they added to our unemployment gap (probably no more than a few tenths of a percentage point).

Although the Rhode Island media are reluctant to use the word, what happened in Rhode Island was basically European-style austerity. When governments decide to throw out a century of economics and pretend that taking a chainsaw to the public sector will somehow magically not wreck the economy, the results aren’t pretty. This is partially because serious austerity measures like Carcieri’s public sector cuts can lock an economy into the austerity death spiral, where austerity weakens the economy, prompting more austerity. This is a lesson being learned not just in Europe, but also in states like Rhode Island that went all in for the same bad economic policies. All across America, the states that opted for austerity during the recession performed worse than states that did not.  When conservative extremist Scott Walker took over in Wisconsin and implemented a severe austerity package that prompted mass protests, Wisconsin’s unemployment rate exploded. A similar wave of job losses is currently blowing through the Northeast region as governments from Maine to Pennsylvania opt for mass layoffs. Because Rhode Island’s recent public sector layoffs have been more in line with the national average, we have largely escaped this regional recession.

Comparing us with the broader Northeast region, however, does not usually paint Rhode Island’s economy in a very flattering light. In fact, because most of the Northeast region did not do as badly as the rest of the country, Rhode Island’s singularly bad record is even worse than it looks. So while public sector cuts explain most of our unemployment gap, alone they do not explain all of it. Some other factor must be at work here, a factor that will be the subject of tomorrow’s post.

RI – What Went Wrong: The Carcieri Effect


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

It may be hard to remember now, but ten years ago, Rhode Island’s unemployment rate was below the national average. Today, of course, it’s the second highest in America. Only Nevada has a worse jobs picture. Clearly, something went very badly wrong. The question is what.

In a multi-part series that will be published throughout this week, I’ll get into the weeds on the specific reasons Rhode Island fell behind. A common theme will be how so many (but not quite all) of the problems originated with the man who is now, as Scott MacKay puts it, “retired in his Saunderstown manse by the sea, hiding from the media and the taxpayers he so avidly fleeced.”

Rhode Island and U.S. unemployment rates. Data from Bureau of Labor Statistics, via Google Public Data.

Donald Carcieri

A cursory glance at the unemployment rate graph points to a likely culprit. What is perhaps most striking about Rhode Island’s decline is just how closely it corresponds with the tenure of Donald Carcieri. In his first few months, Rhode Island performed reasonably well. As America surged to the peak of the first Bush recession, unemployment jumped half a percentage point between January and June of 2003, but in Rhode Island, unemployment inched up by only 0.2 percentage points.

But giving Carcieri credit for his first few months makes about at much sense as blaming Obama for losing jobs during his first few months. The real test of a leader is how the economy performs once their policies have had a chance to take effect. In mid-2003, things began to turn around. Although America’s recovery was relatively anemic, with the unemployment rate falling by only 1.9 percentage points from the peak of 6.3% in June of 2003 to a low of 4.4% in March of 2007, things went much worse in Rhode Island. During that period, unemployment in our state dropped by only 0.7 percentage points, from 5.5% to 4.8%. In June of 2005, we crossed the national rate. Our jobs picture has been below average ever since.

Up through early 2007, Carcieri’s Rhode Island was in a slow, but not unprecedented, decline. State economies fluctuate, and our slide in the mid-2000s was nothing out of the ordinary. But things were about to get worse. A lot worse. In late 2007, the bottom fell out of the Rhode Island economy, and unemployment soared.  Surprisingly, much of the damage was done before the broader US economy began to collapse a little less than a year later.

By April of 2008, when the second Bush recession began in earnest, Rhode Island’s unemployment rate was already at 6.9%—far above the national rate of 5%. Over the next few years, that gap widened from 1.9 percentage points to a peak of 3.3 percentage points in April 2012, but most of the damage was done before the national recession even began. Clearly, something very, very bad happened in Rhode Island in 2006 or early 2007 to spark this collapse.

There is no magical fairy who pummels the economy whenever conservative Republicans find themselves in office.  What devastates the economy is the policies they enact.  Tomorrow we’ll begin to dig into the details of those policies and why they were so destructive.

RI Escapes the Northeast’s Regional Recession

Over the past few months, something momentous has happened to Rhode Island’s economy.  For the first time in nearly a decade, Rhode Island is outperforming our neighbors on jobs.  The whole Northeast is in the midst of a regional recession.  From Maine to Pennsylvania, the unemployment rate is rising sharply.  The one exception?  Rhode Island.  Our unemployment rate continues to fall.  This might be temporary.  We may yet follow our neighbors into the double dip, but for now it appears that we are holding strong.  Given that our jobs picture remains the worst in the region, this news is sorely needed.
Unemployment rates in the Northeast since 2000. Note the sudden upsurge this year in the unemployment rate of every state except Rhode Island. Bureau of Labor Statistics data plotted via Google Public Data.
The reasons for this sudden recession in the Northeast are not a settled question, but the main culprit seems to be large European-style austerity measures.  These measures center around the large cuts in public employment Carcieri was so fond of.  Carcieri, however, is no longer governor, and it seems that our state’s long decline (which began, incidentally, when he took office) may finally be over.  Lincoln Chafee, while hamstrung by a conservative, anti-growth General Assembly, at least is not actively working to wreck Rhode Island.  That is a big step in the right direction, and personally, I am ready to break out the champagne.
I may be the only one.  The media have gotten so used to reporting on our steady slide behind our peers that they apparently no longer bother to check the unemployment numbers.  On Tuesday, GoLocalProv reported that “economic expansion in the state remains below the level to significantly impact the state’s jobs picture, (sic) and remains below national and regional growth.”  Normally, that would be a pretty good guess, but right now we are actually outperforming our neighboring states.

Gemma’s Flip-flop Speaks to Broader Problem


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Anthony Gemma

Anthony GemmaAfter taking a lot of heat for refusing to back fellow Democrats in a recent interview with Buddy Cianci, Anthony Gemma has reversed his position and now says he will support Senator Whitehouse and Congressman Langevin in the general election, although he still won’t support Cicilline if he happens to win the primary.

In the interview, Gemma refused to support Sheldon Whitehouse because, in Gemma’s words, Whitehouse “has not done what’s right for me.” Essentially, because Whitehouse is supporting Cicilline, Gemma refused to support him. Edited highlights of the interview can be seen here:

This rejection of his party prompted a flurry of condemnations from fellow Democrats. The former occupant of the seat, Representative Patrick Kennedy called Gemma’s statements “deeply disappointing.” Buckling under the pressure, Gemma backed down. Campaign spokesman Alex Morash announced that Gemma would vote for Whitehouse and support Langevin. However, Gemma has yet to retract his refusal to vote for David Cicilline if he winds up winning the primary.

This episode may be part of a broader problem for Gemma. Even with friendly audiences, he does not interview well. Buddy Cianci is hardly a fan of Cicilline or Whitehouse. In fact, he made fun of their names during the interview. Cianci started the interview very friendly to Gemma, but Gemma was so evasive in handling questioning that by the end Cianci was complaining that getting answers out of him was “like pulling teeth.” The full interview can be viewed here.

I had a similar experience when I interviewed Gemma in June. After refusing to answer a number of relatively simple questions—like whether he supports single-payer healthcare—Gemma wound up saying this about intervening before Pearl Harbor to stop the holocaust:

To put it mildly, this is probably not the best thing to say when you are being interviewed by a Jew, especially one whose great-grandfather narrowly escaped being sent off to the concentration camps well before Pearl Harbor. To be fair to Gemma, who has not apologized to Rhode Island’s Jewish community for his comments, I am willing to believe that he is not actually anti-semitic. Instead, he may just be a weak interviewer who winds up saying things he later regrets.


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387