"The Bluest State": A Case Study in Progressive Political Policies

Despite the occasional snarky comment (from both sides), thoughtful public citizens of Catholic faith from both sides of the political spectrum earnestly desire a society in which people thrive, economically, socially, and religiously.  We all want to see children enjoying a quality education.  We all want to see young men and women of all races and from all backgrounds have an equal opportunity to succeed in life.  We all want to see the unfortunate have access to housing, nutrition, and health care.

From the most part, what divides us are not first principles but a disagreement as to what works.  (I say, "for the most part," as I do think there is some distance between the left and right on the independent value of freedom of choice -- that is, a freedom from even the well-intentioned directives of government.)  Or, to put it in terms of Catholic teaching, the primary question is one of prudential considerations.  And that, in turn, depends largely on evidence about how policies fare when translated into the real world.

Aaron Renn, an urban analyst, writes in City Journal about Rhodes Island as "The Bluest State."  As Renn describes it, "Rhode Island has the full complement of blue-model orthodoxy: high taxes, high social-services spending, powerful unions, and suffocating regulation."  And the result?  

Small wonder that Rhode Island scores poorly in most business-climate surveys—47th in the Small Business Survival Index and 46th in the Tax Foundation’s rankings of business-tax climate.

Its blue-state enthusiasms have done the state serious damage. Depending on the month, Rhode Island has either the worst or second-worst unemployment rate in the nation: 9.3 percent, according to the latest Bureau of Labor Statistics figures. Since 2000, the state has lost 2.5 percent of its jobs, and what jobs it has created are mostly low-paying. The job situation is so dire that entire local economies have become dominated by the benefits-payment cycle. In Woonsocket, for example, one-third of residents are on food stamps.

On top of this, real incomes have remained "stagnant for decades" and housing is "prohibitively expensive."

Renn's prescription?

Rhode Island has to reduce the size of its government—paring back taxes, spending, and regulation, and doing so over the long haul until it has a fiscally sustainable system that doesn’t strangle its economy. And somehow, the state’s leaders and residents need to rethink their views on development and free enterprise.

You can read the full article here.