Showing posts with label Texas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Texas. Show all posts

Sunday, November 1, 2020

STATE RACES, RED TO BLUE | Heidi's Picks

Sunday, November 1—As Election Day (Tuesday) approaches, the Battleground States are getting special attention. See two takes on a Biden or Trump victory in these states.  (More recently: CNN's guess on the likely range in the Electoral College vote and the American Prospect's "Unsanitized" roundup.)

The following summary of key down-ballot state races was sent to me by Heidi Fiske, who asked me to post it on her behalf, as I have done before:

Nothing is more important than winning the Presidency and taking back the Senate.


But those races are attracting huge sums of money. Not so the state races, which both require and attract less money. 


We will realize in January just how important these overlooked races are, because thats when governors, state AGs, state Secretaries of State, state judges and state legislatures will determine the district lines that will hold for a decade, through 2030, based on this year's foreshortened census. 


The Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee (DLCC), the Democratic body that concerns itself with state races, says that if the 48 state legislative candidates in the links below are elected, they will flip 10 chambers in seven critical states from Red to Blue. Of these seats, 34 are in chambers that will rule on district lines for one-third of all House seats (144 of 435).

  • Heidi's Picks incorporates recommendations of the DLCC, Future Now, and some other individuals and groups.
  • Arizona, 5 legislative candidates
  • Iowa, 4 legislative candidates
  • Michigan, 4 legislative candidates
  • Minnesota, 2 legislative candidates
  • North Carolina, 11 legislative  + Attorney General + Secretary of State + 2 Supreme Court candidates  [NCs superb governor is not included only because he is well-funded and almost certain to win]
  • Pennsylvania, 13 legislative candidates [PAs outstanding Attorney General is not included only because he is considered sure to win]
  • Texas, 9 legislative + 4 Supreme Court

Monday, August 8, 2016

SENIORS | Most Livable Cities

Drum roll. Trumpets.
A group based in Austin, Tex. has developed a livability score for senior citizens

They say it is the first one developed specifically for seniors. That is a dangerous thing to assert since is a fairly obvious thing to do. They haven't looked very hard. I can think of several such scores that have been developed, as long as decades ago.

Meanwhile, the state with the most "top cities" in it (four) is Texas. (New York State is listed as having two cities, "New York City" and "Brooklyn". Actually, folks, since 1898 New York City has incorporated the Borough of Brooklyn.)

If you are still reading about this index, the city in Texas with the top livability score of 79 using an index developed by the group based in Austin, Tex. is...

drum roll

...Austin, Tex.!

Tuesday, September 17, 2013

METROS | Real GDP 2012 Growth 2.5%

Bureau of Economic Analysis map out today shows healthy real-GDP growth in metro areas in 2012. The average of all U.S. metros was 2.5 percent.

Urban economists, politicians and economic consultants watch regional data closely for competitive reasons.

Growth rates provide clues as to the success or failure of regional economic and tax policies.

Metro growth was especially strong (dark and light blue) in in Texas, the Midwest and Northwest, and was weak (brown and beige) in much of upstate New York and New England, Southwest and western Florida.

Growth in the NYC area, which includes Long Island and Northern New Jersey, is middle of the road, about 2 percent.

The map shows the uneven nature of economic growth in the United States. Decline and growth may be close neighbors. California was mixed. Also Florida - some parts, notably Greater Miami, grew rapidly while other metro areas in the state's northwest declined, while mid-Florida grew moderately.

GDP data are a better measure of a local economy than job numbers (unemployment, payroll job growth), but they take much longer to see the light of day. Job numbers for large metro areas are published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics within a month after they are collected. The good news this year is that the BEA is back to getting out the metro GDP data within nine months after the end of the year for which they are reporting. They had slipped to taking more than 12 months. Data delayed are data denied.

For the whole story and a high-resolution map, go to the release on the BEA website.

Saturday, November 15, 2008

EPS | Iraq Is a Hard Place

Nov. 15, 2008–Yesterday evening Economics Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz painted a picture of today's dire economic straits with a broad brush, putting the burdens of the Iraq War in the middle and detailing the finer points of Bush-era economic failures around the sides. The canvas was made less miserable to observe by the fine food and wine served in the comfortable Upper East Side Manhattan home of Alan and Catherine Harper, at a fundraiser for Economists for Peace and Security (EPS).

Joe Stiglitz is introduced by EPS Chair Jamie Galbraith. The room is full and buzzing. CityEconomist is in the first of three rows of chairs facing our speaker. Jamie, son of much-missed EPS leader John Kenneth Galbraith, is here from the University of Texas at Austin, and doesn't hesitate to acknowledge the grand contributions of some sons of Texas to the current financial fiasco.

Certainly, the investment bankers in the Big Apple and mortgage hustlers in Orange County, Calif. couldn't have caused such mischief on such a world-wide scale by themselves. They needed Texan Phil Gramm and the Republican Senate to change the laws to make it all possible. Jamie agrees with me that the must-read story on the high point of the credit default swap hijinx is is the May 30 story in the Texas Observer. Send this link to anyone who still talks about the glories of financial innovation with a respectful demeanor (will some people never learn?).

The evening event caps a day-long conference at the New School on the world-wide financial meltdown. Jamie speaks about the origins of the crisis, modestly refraining from promoting his own new book, The Predator State, which these quotes, sans ellipsis marks, summarize:
The judicial coup of December 2000 that installed Bush and Cheney brought back tax cuts for the wealthy, big increases in military spending, aggressive deregulation. Bush and Cheney placed lobbyists in charge of the regulators, representing, in every case, the most extreme anti-regulation perspective. This is the predator state.
Jamie in his book argues that what began as a well-intentioned anti-regulatory movement deteriorated into crude anti-tax crony capitalism. He expresses delight that the nation has now elected someone who is mortgaged to nobody. He introduces Joe as someone with a unique record of insight and foresight about the dangers of ideological economic policies and the disasters they cause, and holds up a copy of Joe's new book, The Three Trillion Dollar War.

Joe says his initial public estimate of the cost of the war in Iraq was $1 trillion. When he presented a paper to an EPS panel in 2006, he and his co-author Linda Bilmes raised the estimate to $2 trillion. "Linda and I thought early on it might be $2-$3 trillion," he said, "but the administration was quoting very small numbers." (The original Pentagon estimate was $50 billion. Lawrence Lindsey, Assistant to President G. W. Bush for Economic Policy, got into pink-slip-level trouble after raising the estimate to a more realistic range of 1-2 percent of the then-GDP of $10 trillion, to $100-$200 billion. See here and here.)

Joe notes that a contributor to the high cost of the Iraq war is the high injury rate among returning soldiers - 15 injured soldiers for every one killed. Joe says that the U.S. government sometimes classifies an injury as an accident, as when a mine takes out a Humvee and then another Humvee plows into the first one. The injuries from the second event may be classified as an accident. The injured soldiers are adding $600 billion to the nation's unfunded liability and constitute a significant fraction of the war's cost - both economic and human.

Joe describes the Iraq War as the first war that was financed entirely on a credit card. Oil was $23 a barrel when the war started, soared to above $145 in July, has now fallen to $57 a barrel today. Latin America borrowed money to pay for higher oil prices, resulting in credit starvation in the 1980s and "a lost decade of growth" How many lost years will the United States suffer from our recent credit binge?

The failures of recent economic policies may be summarized, says Joe, under three headings:
1. The stimulus and bailout were both misconceived. Most of the stimulus package was used to pay down debt and didn't do much for consumption. Allen Sinai presented a paper projecting the worst downturn since the Great Depression and 8-12 percent unemployment. The bailout amounted to cash for trash, whereas the Brits did it differently and better, with conditions and sanctions. The bailout money has been spent on bonuses and dividends.
2. Financial regulation has failed. The financial boats have holes, their steering is gone and their pilots are drunk.
3. The budget has been mismanaged. A deficit can be a good idea if it is spent on something useful, like roads and technology, which have high returns. Using taxpayers' money to buy toxic assets is not a good use of money. We can evaluate public spending from a long-term and a short-term perspective. Our military spending has been poor managed on both counts. We have been buying less security for more money instead of the reverse.

The $700 billion commitment of the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP aka Bailout) amounts, says Joe, to ten years' worth of global foreign aid. Treasury Secretary Paulson seems to have seen the light and is halting the purchase of the toxic assets, following Gordon Brown's path of buying bank equity [see Telegraph story today].

Summing up, Joe says the United States has been kept going since 1993 by the tech bubble and then the housing bubble and now some improvement in exports. What we have to look forward to is perhaps two years more recession and then a continuing period of slow growth, maybe focused on renewable energy, green jobs.

Note on EPS: CityEconomist is proud that so many good groups owe their existence to New Yorkers. One of them is EPS, which sponsors economic discussions and reports about unnecessary wars and wasteful military contracts. It was founded by the late Bob Schwartz, an economist and investment adviser whose years as a Marine (he never liked being called an ex-Marine - once a Marine, always a Marine, he said proudly) led him to champion the cause of peace. I was Bob's first paid-up member in the late 1980s and followed him as the second EPS Treasurer. Alan Harper is the third. EPS Executive Director Thea Harvey has made a major contribution to bringing EPS to its current thriving condition. Legacies from Bob Eisner and Bob Schwartz have been major factors in the organization's endurance.

Friday, December 7, 2007

TECH | NYS Underperforms

How should one monitor the progress of a state's competitiveness in the stakes for future tech jobs?

One way is to look at the data for federal grants for Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR), which is a way to bring research dollars to a state at the same time as one is building a stable of ponies for future venture-capital bets.

New York City’s Silicon Alley (in conjunction with its more hardware-oriented cousin techspots up the Hudson Valley from Poughkeepsie to Albany and elsewhere in the state) likes to think of itself as #3 after Silicon Valley and Route 128, and a recent ITAC report seeks to make something out of the fact that in the total number of tech jobs, the NYC metro area ranks ahead even of Silicon Valley and Greater Boston. The sheer size of the NYC metro area is what seems to put NYC ahead on the ITAC count. It is certainly true that having a lot of tech jobs in the NYC area is important in creating critical mass for future innovation. But density of tech jobs is surely more important for creating an environment conducive to serendipity, and the other important ingredient is effective leadership from the governor's office.

These factors go a long way to explain why NY State performs so poorly on the number of SBIR awards in FY 2006. New York was in eighth place in FY 2005 as well, so the rank is not an accident of the year 2006. As expected by the conventional wisdom, California ranks #1 with 725 grants and Massachusetts is #2 with 466 grants. But between these two front-runners and NY State (with only 163 grants) are five interlopers: Virginia (221), Texas (176), Colorado (173), Maryland (169) and Ohio (167). The strength of Virginia and Maryland on this list could reflect the proximity of their Beltway components both to agency grant-makers and to the Army and Navy research labs. Texas may also have benefited from its having a former governor in the White House for nearly six years.

But Colorado and Ohio ranking higher than the Empire State? I was mystified and am grateful to my friend David Hochman for helping me understand why they are doing better than NY State. Colorado doesn't have aggressive tech programs at the state level but it has several large Commerce Department (NIST and NOAA) and DOE labs, and in addition, for a range of historic reasons a really vibrant (high-density) tech community around Boulder and Longmont. Ohio has not only the Air Force labs and a significant NASA Center but also an unusual state program called the "Third Frontier" Project, a.k.a. the Ohio Research Commercialization Grant Program (felicitously acronymed ORCGP). This program, which has no direct parallel in NY State, provides aggressive support for institutions attempting to obtain federal grants.

Between 2005 and 2006, Michigan (with Detroit in a near-depression status because of the decline of the U.S. auto industry) dropped off the top ten list and was replaced by Washington (home of Microsoft, 91 grants). In ninth place is Pennsylvania with 133 grants.

Since Governor Eliot Spitzer was not in charge in FY2006, these numbers do not reflect on his current administration. We can hope that New York moves up in the rankings in future.