There are a lot of things that gubernatorial candidates can tell us, but really what I'm mostly interested in what they can do to help job creation. Notice I didn't say "create more jobs," because that's the private sector's job. But governors have a role here.
There are really bad things state governments can do to mess up an economy. Like high taxes, over-regulation, corruption that requires a payoff for every permit. I have lived in states where you got the feeling that bureaucrats sat around worrying all day long that somewhere, somehow, some business was making a profit.
So sometime the best thing a state government can do is get the heck out of the way. But that's just the half of it. Effective governors can make a difference in a state's economy if they work really, really hard and stay focused.
Here's the situation. We have around 450,000 unemployed people in North Carolina.
The unemployment rate is 9.7 percent, which is ridiculously high for North Carolina, which had been a 50-year economic success story until recently.
So I propose that the major goal for the next governor be: Let's get the unemployment rate cut in half.
You can't do this by recruiting a major employer to move here each month. First, that can't be done. There aren't enough of them out there, and, anyway, with the extortionate incentives these kinds of firms require, we'd go broke.
The way you get 200,000, 300,000 additional jobs is in ones and twos. There are around 200,000 businesses in North Carolina, of all sizes. And many of them are paralyzed at the thought of hiring.
They are doing everything they can to avoid taking on more employees. Even when business picks up, they work like the dickens to figure out ways to get orders out the door without staffing up. Because they aren't sure it's going to last, or the cost of health care and other benefits per employee is eating them alive, or they aren't sure what's going to happen to their tax rates. They'd rather pay overtime than hire extra workers, at least until they get more clarity on the future.
So I would suggest that the gubernatorial candidates figure out some concrete things the state can do -- or stop doing -- that gives these businesses more incentive to add workers.
Maybe it's helping to develop deeper export markets. Maybe it's training workers for hard-to-fill jobs. Maybe it's figuring out how to make the tax system simpler so employers can spend more time drumming up business and less time in the back room, filling out forms. Maybe it's streamlining the permitting process, or eliminating rules that don't make any sense.
But I would start with the proposition that we need more jobs in North Carolina, and the governor ought to be focused on that 24/7.
There are people who want an Education Governor, or Environmental Governor, or Good Roads Governor, etc., etc.
It's easy to get distracted when you're governor, but the number one challenge is encouraging and making it easier for people who run companies to hire. Everything else gets better if the unemployment rate goes down.
Either Walter Dalton or Pat McCrory is going to be the boss next January. Each should start creating a list of things that need to be done, job wise, that they can start working on after the inauguration. They shouldn't worry if they get criticized for being focused on such mundane things as obsessing on how to make it easier for a small business to hire. They shouldn't worry if people think they're not big picture enough.
When Lou Gerstner was hired as CEO of IBM, someone asked him what his vision was for the company. This was in the early 90's, when IBM was losing enormous amounts of money. Vision? Vision! We're bleeding from the ears! The last thing we need now is vision, he harrumphed. We've got to stop losing money. IBM exists today because of Gerstner's no-nonsense, bottom-line approach.
The last thing we need in the next governor is a high-falutin visionary with lots of applause lines but no moxie. We're in a deep ditch. I don't want a North Carolina 2040 Plan out of the next governor.
We need someone who will literally roll up his sleeves and figure out how the state government can help the private sector now. That's going to take a lot of digging in, finding stuff out, following through, moving the bureaucracy, knocking heads at times. It's going to be back-breaking hard work requiring an engaged manager.
As you look at the two candidates for governor, ask yourself who you think has the passion, curiosity, and focus for that kind of work. I honestly don't know the answer to that right now.
But I am not going to be impressed with a candidate who spends all his time running down the other guy.
I wouldn't hire a job prospect for an important managerial job whose major selling point to me is that the other guy is a bum.
I want to know what in this candidate's background will convince me that he's got the stuff for a very tough job, helping to get people back to work.
Put it another way, which one of these guys strikes you as being more likely to be in the office on a Saturday, trying to figure this out? Vote for him.


Comments
Well. I'm doubting this
Mon, 05/21/2012 - 00:57 — brian_vosburghWell. I'm doubting this column was a response to my comment(s):
http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/05/20/2072771/why-nc-lost-so-many-jobs.html
but it sure was timely. :-)
You might have to change what sorts of plans you are looking for your preferred candidate to propose; since there didn't appear to be much in this research to indicate NC's job losses were caused by government "getting in the way" of business. Perhaps we could reduce our reliance on maufacturing? Or we could restrict immigrants from other states?
Hmmm
Thu, 05/10/2012 - 11:13 — brian_vosburghSo, where are the N&O articles with interviews with small business owners quoted saying the Supply Side things you are claiming? My (admittedly narrow) experience is that hiring is based mostly on perceived future demand, which is typically derived by the direction of change of recent past demand; not on future "taxes" or future "health care costs" or future "benefit costs". If the demand is steadily growing, I have never ever heard an owner or manager say "Sorry, we can't hire anybody to fulfill those orders because those stinking Democrats will just tax us more or screw us with some sort of health insurance law." They might bitch about the taxes, but they are happy to take what's left after the sale. Where's your supporting data that when government "get[s] the heck out of the way" small businesses hire, even if it's anecdotal newspaper stories?
Maybe you can sick your investigative reporters on our government and uncover all these evil tax forms and complex, unnecessary rules. You imply they are simply there for the picking; we just need a governor with less "vision" and more "focus". Put your staff where your mouth is.
Also, if our governor could do such a thing, apparently by convincing our legislators to ignore their various parochial interests, and NC's unemployment were cut in half; would it not just go back up as people from other states move here?
I'm just not seeing how this can be solved at a state level. Help me out here. :-)
These are all good thoughts
Thu, 05/10/2012 - 11:46 — danbarkin (author)These are all good thoughts and I will think about how we can do what you say. I don't think that the only actors here are at the state level. Obviously, demand is a factor. Obviously, what happens in Congress, at the EPA, in Europe is a factor.
But I think that states and localities have an important role at the margins. I keep hearing about jobs that are hard to fill because employers can't find workers with the right skill sets. I have seen first hand how decisions made at the state and local level are at the worst a major obstacle and at the least an impediment to job creation. As a reporter, I saw the hoops that developers and builders needed to go through to get projects underway. At the time, I didn't think much about it, but a tremendous amount of a developer's time is spent not in grading lots and pouring cement, but in negotiating the myriad of state and local regulatory hurdles.
I have also lived in Maryland, where governments were, let us say, unenthusiastic about creating a friendly climate for business.
developers and builders?
Thu, 05/10/2012 - 12:44 — brian_vosburghSo, are you saying jobs are suppressed by the hoops imposed on developers and builders? Or are you extrapolating their hoops to the rest of the economy? Are the jobs you are talking about those supplied by the actual development or by the businesses in place once the development is complete? Either which way, it sounds like you are particularly sensitive to the regulations imposed on developers and builders; and I'm not sure those are easily modified without affecting many interested parties!
I can agree the organization and fulfillment of those regulations is disorganized and frustrating; but if the demand (and resulting profit) is there, the developers will either negotiate the maze or hire someone to do it for them. I would use corruption and bribes as a barometer as to whether our regulations are really too much. Unless there's a lot of illegal behavior I have not heard of, I surmise the lack of such is a fair indication the regulations are not too bad. (Or maybe the N&O can undercover this underworld?) Whenever our economy was booming over the past 20 years, I saw plenty of construction! Yeah, the regulations must've been painful, but it didn't seem to slow it down. As a result, my conclusion differs from yours: I don't see how reducing regulations will increase jobs if the demand is not there.
Anyway, if you have seen lots of onerous and unnecessary regulations in development and construction, I guess that's where you can send your reporters. Their reports can be used by our new governor from Day One; and if the result is reduced regulations and, as a result of the reduced regulations, more jobs, I will come back here and publicly change my attitude. :-)
Darn fine comments Dan
Thu, 05/10/2012 - 07:56 — AgentPierceDarn fine piece Dan. :-)
When I saw Editor's Blog I was afraid it would be Stevie Ford. Thankfully it wasn't.
******
Follow AgentPierce on Facebook
Ha. Thanks.
Thu, 05/10/2012 - 08:39 — danbarkin (author)Ha. Thanks.