Financial FAQs
We have austerity in our own country as a result of the Great Recession, but it doesn’t fall equally on all states. In fact, states suffering the most are mainly those in the South, Midwest and manufacturing rust belts.
We also know most of them are red states, and so the most conservative. Yet those states—the poorest, who have lost the most wealth—also receive the most government benefits.
How can that be so when they have spawned the most conservative politicians who decry government benefits of any kind? Dean P. Lacy, a professor of political science at Dartmouth College, is one of several researchers who have identified this anachronism. Support for Republican candidates, who generally promise to cut government spending, has increased since 1980 in states where the federal government spends more than it collects. The greater the dependence, the greater the support for Republican candidates, says his research.
Conversely, states that pay more in taxes than they receive in benefits tend to support Democratic candidates. And Professor Lacy found that the pattern could not be explained by demographics or social issues.
But it can be explained by other factors. One of my earlier columns, entitled “The Have and Have-Not States”, identified several of the factors that differentiate the poorest from the wealthiest states in the U.S., as measured by those states with the highest percentage of passport holders. It comes from a study reported on Grey’s Blog, which shows New Jersey with the highest percentage of passports-68.36 percent-to Mississippi with 19.86 percent of its population having passports.
Grey’s Blog
That factor is openness to outside experience, which is a psychological trait that comes from either having overseas’ relations, or a better education, or a geographical proximity to other cultures. Those states with the highest percentage of passport holders had also the most diverse population, were most educated, most politically liberal, and the wealthiest. Of course, wealth seems to go in hand with education, which shouldn’t be surprising.
Graph: Grey’s Blog
But those same states also had the best public services, most creative workforce and best health care outcomes, as well. Conversely, those states with the fewest passport holders were the least educated, least wealthy, even though they garnered the most governmental services.
Paul Krugman has listed 3 reasons in his own blog why the poorest states tend to elect conservative politicians, who certainly have not enhanced the economic opportunities of their own constituents.
“And what these severe conservatives hate, above all, is reliance on government programs,” says Krugman. “Rick Santorum declares that President Obama is getting America hooked on “the narcotic of dependency.” Mr. Romney warns that government programs “foster passivity and sloth.” Representative Paul Ryan, the chairman of the House Budget Committee, requires that staffers read Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged,” in which heroic capitalists struggle against the “moochers” trying to steal their totally deserved wealth, a struggle the heroes win by withdrawing their productive effort and giving interminable speeches.”
But he doesn’t mentioning scape-goating, a common tactic used by the most conservative politicians to explain why their own constituents tend to be worse off than those in the blue, more liberal states.
Though Christ’s teaching, “Let he among you who is without sin cast the first stone” should be foremost in the minds of conservative church-goers, particularly, conservative pundits have blamed government and high taxes for their ills, when in fact it has been their own Social Darwinist views that has held back development in the red states.
In fact history has shown that it is during periods of regulatory breakdown, when so-called ‘free market’ ideologies prevailed as during the Hoover and GW Bush eras—i.e. when government oversight was at its weakest—that the greatest economic downturns happened. So it should be no surprise that “Political scientists who use Congressional votes to measure such things find that the current G.O.P. majority is the most conservative since 1879,” says Krugman, “which is as far back as their estimates go.”
That was the era of social Darwinism—when the struggle for survival of the fittest prevailed and made sense to Americans, as we were still struggling to settle and civilize our wildernesses.
But the American landscape is far different today. Modern technology has conquered the means of production, so that we suffer from too much being produced rather than too little. What we cannot or will not domestically produce is easily imported. That is the reason for the succession of burst asset bubbles—from the dot-com market crash, to too- big-to-fail financial institutions, to housing—that Americans have suffered through.
So there is no reason for a regression to 19th century thought and philosophy that the Republican Presidential candidates seem to be yearning for. There is also no reason for the wide divergence of wealth between states. Research has shown the most prosperous states are the most pro-government, most forward-looking, most open to other cultures and new ideas. What economy (or state) can grow otherwise?
Harlan Green © 2012
Comments are closed or deactivated
Harlan Mitt Romney is from Massachusetts, Rick Santorum is from Pennsylvania, Newt Gingrich is from Virginia and Ron Paul is from Texas. All but Paul are from Obama “blue” states,” and Paul is from the state that has weathered the current recession best.
Romney is from Michigan….Newt Gingrich from Georgia, Pennsylvania turned red, and Texas has become a red state since GW Bush..So maybe in past elections, Leo, but not lately.
Really a thought-provoking read Harlan. I hear what your saying about not needing to turn back the clock, but I think what most “red states” object to is a growing lack of local and familial autonomy. Power is so centralized in Washington that folks don’t feel any control over their own lives–everything is dictated from the top down, with a “one size fits all” approach. This red/blue paradigm is terribly out-dated and unserving. Surely there is something terribly wrong with a system spending far more on defense than any other sector though there hasn’t been a war on our lands since, hmmmm, well I guess since the Civil War? And yet the only candidate to propose such outlandish prospects as the entire system needs overhauling, Ron Paul, is called “the crazy uncle in the basement” by his own “party”. In our over-simplification we have lost the very premise of Democracy–both Red and Blue
Romney was governor of Massachusetts, Gingrich lives in Virginia, Pennsylvania went for Obama, and yes, Texas is Republican, and the state that has survived the Recession best.
I believe my main prediction that this year’s election will be about taxes and its corollary issue the national debt, instead of jobs, is becoming more evident as we have grown to accept 8% plus unemployment as the “new normal.”
Yes, Mishell, but I don’t see red state political candidates much concerned about family, and women in particular, since they are passing anti-birth control, anti-abortion laws, and bringing most conservative churches into politics. It is conservatives who are using big government to control women’s lives, in particular, which puts the lie to their smaller government mantra. They only want smaller government when it doesn’t suit them, right?
Harlan Obama picked a needless fight with the Catholic Church by insisting that the Church pay for services that counter its teachings. His ad hoc “compromise” still has the Church paying for insurance that will now pay for the services. He should have planned this one better. Now he has to shore up his credentials with one of his formerly reliable voter bases, Catholics.
It wasn’t church, but its health care system that didn’t want to offer women’s services, which means it was more concerned about catholic doctrine, rather than women’s health!
If we were to begin to shift the sociopolitical model from a Dominator to a Partnership system we wouldn’t have so many men deciding so many “women’s issues” which would be integrated into general “social issues” affecting all of us equally. Once that’s the case we won’t need government to decide what to do and how to use/not use our bodies, it will feel like common sense they don’t belong there in the first place. Women will go back to old methods of b/c and abortion if forced to, so it really doesn’t matter what the church or the government ultimately decide for us. It’s like trying to choose between Big Brother and Dictator. I’m workiing toward neither.
Hi,
Thank you four your nice writting on Why are Some States Poorer Than Others
Thanks.
Harlan, Thank you for this very provocative article. Charlie Murray’s “Coming Apart” is getting a lot of attention. I think it is neat that RPCV authors are posting vitally important questions. The contrast between the poor and the richer states is intriguing, but calls for much more study. I would think that passport possession is a reflection of wealth, not a came of it.
And as for Ayn Rand; I read Atlas Shrugged as a college freshman and I loved it. Until, I realized that there were no children in the novel or indeed in her philosophy. Children make all the difference.
Also, it was not insurance companies, Harlan, that didn’t want to cover contraceptives, it was the Catholic Bishops who demanded that all church affiliated institutions follow church doctrine. That Doctrine is emphatically anti- artificial birth control, as well as abortion.
Leo,
There is really no way for Obama to compromise politically with Church Doctrine. As Obama stated in his “compromise” announcement, the medical consensus is that the ability to control
fertility and space one’s family is essential to a woman’s health.
The Bishops reject that medical finding. Period. The President also took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution which makes access to birth control and unrestricted abortion in the first trimester a civil right. The Bishops are opposed to these civil rights.
Corrrection: I would think that passport possession is a reflection of wealth, not a cause of it.
Yes, Joanne, so maybe wealth is precursor for better education, more openness to others, love of travel, etc.? Good question. Did you see Nancy Pelosi interview with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow last night? She says Catholic Bishops, evangelicals, and other extreme right wing churches have always been against any kind of contraception…their anti-abortion attacks have only been a smoke screen that covered up their real objective–to abolish family planning in toto, which is “something that women have been in control of for thousands of years,” to quote Pelosi! How is that for turning back clock on the modern world! Harlan
The Conference of Catholic Bishops stated it will not pay for services that are counter to the Church’s teachings. It has promised to drop insurance converage for its employees if that insurance provides those services. It is no news that the Catholic Church opposes contraception, a teaching that was emphatically restated by Pope John Paul II. To ask it to pay for these services is akin to asking Baptists to pay for our altar wine.
So the Catholic Church is an “extreme, right wing, evangelical church.” I knew introducing vernacular music into the mass would lead us to draw closer to our Baptist brethren.
No, I said, Pelosi said..”… Catholic Bishops, evangelicals, and other extreme right wing churches have always been against any kind of contraception…”. maybe I should have said…”and other, more extreme right wing churches.” I leave it up to women to decide if this is a direct attack on women’s overall health and welfare, as Pelosi contends.
Now is exactly the time to quote from JFK’s address to the Greater Houston Ministerial Alliance on September 12, 1960. This speech, I might add, had, at the time, the support of the Catholic Conference of Bishops.
“But let me say, with respect to other countries, that I am wholly opposed to the state being used by any religious group, Catholic or Protestant, to compel, prohibit, or persecute the free exercise of any other religion. And I hope that you and I condemn with equal fervor those nations which deny their Presidency to Protestants and those which deny it to Catholics. And rather than cite the misdeeds of those who differ, I would cite the record of the Catholic Church in such nations as Ireland and France–and the independence of such statesmen as Adenauer and De Gaulle.
But let me stress again that these are my views–for contrary to common newspaper usage, I am not the Catholic candidate for President. I am the Democratic Party’s candidate for President who happens also to be a Catholic. I do not speak for my church on public matters–and the church does not speak for me.
Whatever issue may come before me as President–on birth control, divorce, censorship, gambling or any other subject–I will make my decision in accordance with these views, in accordance with what my conscience tells me to be the national interest, and without regard to outside religious pressures or dictates. And no power or threat of punishment could cause me to decide otherwise.”
Harlan “Catholic Bishops, evangelicals, and other extreme right wing churches…” clearly means that the Catholic Church is an extreme right wing church.
Joanne Kennedy clearly stated that he would act in accordance with what his “conscience” told him. Presumably his conscience was influenced by his religion. In any case this is not relevant. The Chuch will not pay for services it deems to be contrary to its teachings. The instructions to the faithful are for each soul to use in coming to her decisions about contraception, birth control, abortion, and such.
More importantly, I believe it was a mistake for Obama to pick a fight with the Catholic Church in an election year when Catholics constitute a normally reliable Democrat voting block.
Leo,
Of course, Kennedy’s conscience was influenced by his religion - such as the 8th command “Not to bear false witness,” that, as you may know includes not swearing an oath falsely. Public officials take an oath to uphold the constitution, including the First Amendment, separation of church and state. Kennedy said if there were ever a conflict between his conscience and his oath of office, he would resign the office. Contrast this with the current candidate who voted against his conscience because he had to “take one for the team.”
The issue of church control of state’s actions, particularly around birth control, was a real issue for those of us PCVs working with poor women in a country that had a Concordat with the Vatican. If there were a Peace Corps library/archive/museum, it would be possible to study and research how PCVs worked in country around this problem.
Joey
As I said, Church teachings are used by the faithful in making their choices. One has to take responsibility for his actions.
Most have lost sight of the issue, the Catholic Church has stated it will not pay for practices or services that it forbids. That people use these services or practices is a subject for individual decision and responsibility. But one cannot expect the Church to pay for them.
This is a classic clash of constitutionally protected rights. I look forward to a judicial resolution.
Joey
Yes, it may be decided in the courts but, if the Church has to pay, it will simply drop health insurance for its employees. Of course, under the new health care law, the Church will have to pay a fine for not providing health insurance. That is if the new law survives its court review.