The so-called free-market miracle of Texas

Daniel Gross pulls out real numbers to show that the economic "miracle" of Texas was made possible by massive growth of state government:

[T]here's less than meets the eye to the Texas miracle. When a state's population grows, it has to add more public employees to provide services — more cops, more teachers, more DMV clerks. This chart posted by Ryan Avent of the Economist shows that Texas's jobs growth in recent years has come mostly from the oil and gas industry, and from things funded by the government: education, healthcare, and federal and state employment. This chart posted by blogger Matt Yglesias shows that Texas's government payroll has been in a huge, long-term uptrend. Jared Bernstein, former economic aide to Vice President Joe Biden, notes that Rick Perry's Texas has been the capital of government job creation. From 2007 through 2010, Texas lost 53,000 jobs on net, not a bad performance in an era when the U.S. economy shed several million. But that's because it lost 178,000 private sector jobs while adding 125,000 public sector ones. Notes Bernstein: "47% of all government jobs added in the US between 2007 and 2010 were added in Texas."
But there's more . . . In 2010, while Rick Perry was railing against government spending his actions betrayed his words:
Perry himself entered Texas into controversial contracts with Washington lobbyists who helped bring billions of dollars in federal money to Perry's home state, some of it via earmarks. Some of those lobbyists would wind up pleading guilty in a separate major bribery scandal.

Continue ReadingThe so-called free-market miracle of Texas

The “Super Committee” is Neither

The recently passed S. 365 sets up a Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, often referred to as the “super committee.” The committee is supposed to do several things but, if there is no agreement, automatic budget cuts across the board for Medicare, non-defense discretionary pending and defense spending will take place which would drastically harm the social services safety net for seniors, the disabled, pregnant women, and the unborn, among others. In Title IV Section 401(b) (3) (A) (i) of the Act the committee is charged to "provide recommendations and language that will significantly improve the short-term and long-term fiscal imbalance of the Federal Government." So, what the heck does that mumbo-jumbo mean? The new laws shall “significantly” improve the debt situation. “Significantly” is defined as:

“Having or expressing a meaning; meaningful; or, Having or expressing a covert meaning; suggestive; or, Having or likely to have a major effect; important; or, Fairly large in amount or quantity; or, relating to observations or occurrences that are too closely correlated to be attributed to chance and therefore indicate a systematic relationship.”
or defined as: “[I]n a significant manner: to a significant degree; or, it is significant; or, having meaning; or, having or likely to have influence or effect: important ; or, of a noticeably or measurably large amount; or, probably caused by something other than mere chance.” All of the Republican members appointed to the “super committee” by the Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and the House Speaker, John Boehner (R-OH) have pledged to Grover Norquist that they will not vote for any tax increases.  In effect, the most significant means of "short-term and long-term" deficit reduction cannot and will not be voted in favor of by any Republican member of the Joint Select Committee. The only report which may then pass is a report which the majority supports for severe cuts in non-defense discretionary programs and entitlements such as Medicare and Social Security. [More . . .]

Continue ReadingThe “Super Committee” is Neither