|
Economics Journal or Liberal Propaganda? July 2, 2009 The summer issue of The Connecticut Economy, published by UConn’s economics department, declares that Big Government isn’t a problem in the Nutmeg State. In “Sizing-Up Connecticut’s Public Sector,” professors Dennis Heffley and MaryJane Lenon examine two metrics -- spending as a share of gross domestic product and state-local employees per capita -- and conclude that government here is “quite lean.” It’s not the first time Heffley, who heads the econ department, has made the assertion. Other pieces include “Connecticut Government: Fit or Fat?” (Summer 1997), “Just How Deep Is Connecticut’s Public Trough?” (Spring 1999), and “My Big Fat State Government?” (Fall 2002). In all, Heffley cherry-picked data to determine that “state and local government in Connecticut looks pretty trim,” “the public sector in Connecticut is leaner … than in many states,” and “Connecticut state and local government looks pretty lean and may be a contributor to the state’s economic dominance rather than an economic burden.” Selective stat-citing and fishy number-crunching are hallmarks of The Connecticut Economy. It’s disappointing when the publication of an academic institution -- particularly a government-funded school -- engages in blatant bias. It’s maddening when that publication claims to be “objective in our analyses.” Heffley’s defenses of his public-payroll colleagues skip more than a few questions worth pondering. Why did the state’s budget quintuple, adjusted for both population and inflation, between 1970 and 2005? Why did the share of personal income gobbled up by Connecticut state and local government grow by 16 percent between 1988 and 2008? Why are wages and salaries for state and local employees, as determined by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, so outrageously high? Why do their benefit packages -- vacation, pensions, health insurance, etc. -- far exceed those of private-sector workers? Arthur W. Wright, who headed the school’s economics department from 1979 to 1989, is The Connecticut Economy’s most reliable advocate for left-wing causes. In the Spring 2006 issue, he used dodgy data from the Council on State Taxation to argue that “Connecticut is not an especially high-tax state for businesses.” (The Tax Foundation thinks otherwise -- it puts Connecticut’s business-tax attractiveness at 37th in the nation.) Last year, Wright averred that “a primary cause -- likely the single biggest factor” for Connecticut’s ridiculously high electricity prices was the state’s restructuring of its power market in the late 1990s. (Never mind the fact that energy-infrastructure-killing NIMBYism is pandemic in the state, or that the cost of the natural gas that fuels generation has risen.) Earlier this year, he disparaged “free-market zealots” who “overstate their case against government regulation.” But Wright’s “A Win-Win State Educational Policy,” which appeared in the Summer 2007 issue, stands as probably the most one-sided piece ever to appear in The Connecticut Economy. “Evidence is overwhelming that targeting [early childhood education] at low-income kids would be that rare bird,” he swooned, “a win-win public policy initiative. Investing big in ECE would greatly enhance economic efficiency, yielding higher returns than spending on buildings, equipment -- or ‘catch-up’ efforts like enriching inner-city elementary and high schools. Into the bargain, society would also reap higher future incomes for today’s disadvantaged children, making for a more equitable distribution of income.” There is “overwhelming evidence” on preschool, but it points to the opposite of Wright’s assessment. As the Thomas B. Fordham Institute’s Chester E. Finn, Jr. recently wrote, “Contrary to proponents’ claims, few preschool programs confer a lasting educational boost.” At the other end of the education journey, The Connecticut Economy regularly extols the economic value of college. (And the best place to obtain a degree is, of course, UConn!) This spring’s issue gave the school’s president, Michael J. Hogan, a chance to whine that “state appropriations have fallen off in relative terms,” and allege, albeit dubiously, that “every state dollar allocated to UConn, including the Health Centers, adds over $5 to Connecticut’s GDP.” The Connecticut Economy occasionally includes ideas and articles that deviate from the liberal line. The weak link between spending on K-12 government schools and student achievement has been noted several times. A 2008 article, co-authored by Heffley, offered a lucid look at the destructiveness of state-level meddling in healthcare, and masterfully debunked much of the spin of the single-payer lobby. But these infrequent concessions don’t come close to providing readers adequate balance. As is the case with pay-us-dues-or-quit union activities and subsidized political campaigns, The Connecticut Economy is funded by many individuals who disagree with what it has to say. The quarterly’s editors should be given a choice: Provide some diversity of thought, or find your own funding. D. Dowd Muska is a writer, commentator and lecturer. His website is www.dowdmuska.com. # # # # #
|
