College profs, conservative activists disagree on tax, migration data


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

Tell a lie long enough and it becomes the truth. In Rhode Island politics this has become the case with the idea that people are fleeing the Ocean State because of our uncompetitive tax structure. But a new local “think tank” has come to a decidedly different conclusion than some of the other local “think tanks” on this question.

“The academic literature is mixed on the question of whether tax rates influence where people choose to live, and research suggests that factors like employment opportunities and quality of life are more salient,” reads the report created by professors from Bryant University and Rhode Island College.

Here’s a chart from the report:

tax policy migration study

The report “Rhode Island’s Labor Force and Tax Policy in Perspective” was published by the Collaborative, a non-partisan think tank made up of the 11 colleges and universities in Rhode Island. The Providence Journal profiled the group’s efforts in a front page story today. It’s funded by the Rhode Island Foundation and puts college professors and academics together to research ideas related to politics (the governor, House speaker and Senate president “appointed a panel of policy leaders who are responsible for coming to consensus on research areas of importance to Rhode Island.”)

The Collaborative is investigating several areas of research – others include measuring the economic impacts of tax-free arts districts. You can read all their research briefs here.

The tax policy and migration study is politically significant because it draws very different conclusions than reports done by right-wing think tanks in Rhode Island that often generate much media attention and has become a talking point for local politicians.

Rhode Islanders, it concludes, pay less in income taxes than people in neighboring states, and we generally earn less money. It suggests Rhode Islanders aren’t moving to neighboring states anymore than people from neighboring states are moving to Rhode Island and that we aren’t moving to cheaper states like North Carolina and Florida anymore than people from neighboring states.

About unemployment, it says between 2006 and 2012, Rhode Island lost the most jobs from the construction industry followed by manufacturing and then transportation.

About education, it says, “In terms of educational attainment, the primary measure of a skilled labor force, the state ranks below Massachusetts and Connecticut. Perhaps because of this educational difference, Rhode Island has a greater share of its workforce in lower-paying occupations and a smaller portion of its workforce in higher-paying occupations.”

Clarification: Amber Caulkins said the Collaborative doesn’t vie itself as a think tank.

And here’s more on this research and whether or not people vote with their feet when it comes to tax policy.

Sheldon goes into belly of the beast this weekend


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

sheldon netrootsFirst it was Rhode Island. Then the hallowed halls of Congress and soon Iowa.

But the next stop for Senator Sheldon Whitehouse’s tour de force for progressive justice will be right into the belly of the beast. This weekend he’ll be in Sea Island, Georgia participating in the annual “World Forum” organized by the American Enterprise Institute.

AEI is, according to Right Wing Watch, “one of the oldest and most influential of the pro-business right-wing think tanks. It promotes the advancement of free enterprise capitalism, and has been extremely successful in placing its people in influential governmental positions, particularly in the Bush Administration. AEI has been described as one of the country’s main bastions of neoconservatism.”

Said Whitehouse about his decision to participate, “I expect my views on these issues will differ greatly with those of the leaders at AEI, but I look forward to a forthright discussion. Fair and efficient markets have always been the engine of broadly shared opportunity and prosperity in America. This is especially true for our health care and energy markets, where the stakes could not be higher.”

Whitehouse will participate on two panel discussions: on one he’ll talk about “the promise of health care delivery system reform,” according to his office, and on the other he will discuss “the market distortions created by the economy-wide costs of carbon dioxide pollution from fossil fuels.”

The faux-liberal feedback loop created by Brookings and Gina Raimondo


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
Progressives don't cheer on pension cuts like this and a progressive think tank wouldn't suggest a Democrat spearhead a conservative initiative like pension cuts.
Progressives don’t cheer on pension cuts like this and a progressive think tank wouldn’t suggest a Democrat spearhead a conservative initiative like pension cuts.

A recently released Brookings Institution blueprint on how to cut public pension plans offered this advice: “having a Democrat lead the effort goes a long way towards countering the charge that reforms are merely a conservative attack on labor.”

Shortly thereafter Gina Raimondo – the living, breathing (and campaigning!) prototype for the Brown Center at Brookings’ wisdom – sent out a fundraising email bragging about the accolade. But instead of just tooting her own horn, she also slipped in a not-insignificant exaggeration about the think tank report.

“Just the other day, a progressive think-tank heralded Gina’s leadership on solving the pension crisis as a national model,” wrote her campaign manager Eric Hyers.

Brookings is not a progressive think tank. It doesn’t pretend to be, and isn’t regarded as such.

Neil Lewis, a veteran New York Times reporter, described Brookings as being “liberal-centrist.” And the progressive blog FireDogLake was :

“The Brookings Institute was once a bastion of liberal thought … Now, though, it has become the Alan Colmes of think-tanks, fake liberals who meekly accept conservative mythology on every major point, but says we should at least think of the misery we are causing.”

And the Center for Media and Democracy, the even farther left-leaning think tank that mainly goes after ALEC and other Koch brother initiatives, had a similar take on Brookings. Its wiki SourceWatch.org described Brookings history as America’s oldest think tank.

Initially centrist, the Institution took its first step rightwards during the depression, in response to the New Deal. In the 1960s, it was linked to the conservative wing of the Democratic party, backing Keynsian economics. From the mid-70s it cemented a close relationship with the Republican party. Since the 1990s it has taken steps further towards the right in parallel with the increasing influence of right-wing think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation.

Brookings, according to SourceWatch, gets major funding from conservative interests.

I asked on Twitter how people would describe Brookings, and here are some of the responses I got:

and

When I asked if anyone thought Brookings was a progressive think tank, responses ranged from:

to:

.

Why does Gina Raimondo hold such a minority opinion about Brookings? I sent an email to Hyers yesterday and he did not respond yet. So I will offer my theory:

It’s a time-tested political tradition in Rhode Island to claim to be somewhere to the left of one’s actual politics. It’s why the General Assembly is dominated by one political party but not one political ideology. It probably has something to do with why Barrington millionaire Ken Block launched his political career as a “Moderate.” And it’s probably why Justin Katz, who I think is the most unabashedly conservative voice in Rhode Island, thought to tweet this earlier this week:

I was surprised Katz wasn’t proud to claim the mantle of most conservative person in Rhode Island.

And then I remembered that Gina Raimondo rebranded herself as a progressive to run for governor. And how many conservatives in the state legislature have confessed privately that they run as Democrats because it is the easiest way to win an election.  And how often conservative pundits blame our economic problems on 60 years of Democrats in power rather than the largely right-wing agenda the current crop of ruling Democrats at the State House have implemented during the past decade (tax cuts for the rich, shrink government and austerity for social services).

And in the future, I’ll recall how the Brookings Institution is advising the world – using Rhode Island as its example – that “having a Democrat lead the effort goes a long way towards countering the charge that reforms are merely a conservative attack.” And that those are the types of organizations that Gina Raimondo would describe as being progressive.

For an actual progressives take on pension politics, read Sam Bell’s post on what Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren said about pension cuts and wealth transfers to hedge fund managers.