IBJOpinion

MARCUS: Governor's ship of a state losing sailors?

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Morton Marcus

On Jan. 19, Gov. Mitch Daniels delivered his State of the State address. I hope you heard or read it. If not, you can go to the governor’s Web site and read it. It has a nautical theme and will lift your spirits.

That’s what a State of the State address is supposed to do. Make us feel better about who we are, where we are and where we are going. Just a few days later, President Obama did the same for the nation. Now all of us can get on with shopping for Valentine’s Day.

The State of the State message puts the legislative branch particularly into convulsive congeniality. Every governor is the official captain of the state cheerleaders. His message inspires the clever, artful gymnastic exercises by our General Assembly. The members climb on one another’s shoulders, flip in the air, and always land gracefully on their feet. 

Sadly, these efforts rarely have any positive effect on the team, the more than 6 million Hoosiers slogging through the mud on the fields of reality. But the legislative chambers are not the place for reality.

Daniels offered a strong platform for progress in difficult times. He encouraged continued reduction in governmental excesses at the local level. But someone fed him the wrong facts on what has been done. For example, the governor said the Legislature “reduced the number of cooks in the assessment kitchen by about 1,000.”

Yes, there are far fewer township assessors, but how many fewer people work on assessments today in Indiana? In many counties, former township assessors are now on the county payroll instead of the township rolls.  

It was good to hear the state could save $40 million to $50 million by changing the way it pays investment fees for its retirement funds. One does wonder, however, why that step was not taken earlier in this cost-conscious, detail-oriented administration.

He supported the fatuous constitutional caps on property taxes while giving nominal encouragement for less politics in the redistricting process that is approaching.

I was cheered by the governor’s declaration that only “one in 11 workers is unemployed.” However, it troubled me when I realized the governor should have said “one in 10 workers is unemployed.”

“Oh,” you say, “nitpicking, fault-seeking, fatuous figure freak, that’s of no consequence.”

I agree. What difference does it make if the governor neglects nearly 25,000 unemployed Hoosiers? Probably they weren’t listening to his speech; certainly, the media representatives and most members of the Legislature wouldn’t care. 

What troubles me is that Daniels was not fed the right information about unemployment in Indiana. Our unemployment rate may be below the national average and below those of surrounding states, but those facts do not tell the real story.

From the end of 2007 to December 2009, Indiana lost 274,000 employed workers, a decline of 8.9 percent, and the third-worst percentage decline in the nation, behind only Alabama and Michigan. Yet the number of people unemployed in Indiana rose only 161,000. Our labor force (the number employed plus the number unemployed) fell 113,000. To make this statistic clearer—of every 100 Hoosiers who lost jobs, 59 became unemployed and 41 left the labor force.

What is going on? If this is not a wild statistical anomaly, what does it mean for our economic development and education policies?

The demographics of our state are the foundation of our future. In this census year, this issue should have been a major concern of the governor’s State of the State address. Are these Hoosier workers retiring or abandoning market employment? Are they leaving Indiana? Are they unemployable except in the closed factories of inefficient companies?

The governor discussed new jobs for Hoosier workers. But, if two of every five job losers are not seeking work, what does it say about the state of our state?•

__________

Marcus taught economics for more than 30 years at Indiana University and is the former director of IU’s Business Research Center. His column appears weekly. He can be reached at mmarcus@ibj.com.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Those of you yelling to deport them all should at least understand that the law allows minors (if not from a bordering country) to argue for asylum. If you don't like the law, you can petition Congress to change it. But you can't blindly scream that they all need to be deported now, unless you want your government to just decide which laws to follow and which to ignore.

  2. 52,000 children in a country with a population of nearly 300 million is decimal dust or a nano-amount of people that can be easily absorbed. In addition, the flow of children from central American countries is decreasing. BL - the country can easily absorb these children while at the same time trying to discourage more children from coming. There is tension between economic concerns and the values of Judeo-Christian believers. But, I cannot see how the economic argument can stand up against the values of the believers, which most people in this country espouse (but perhaps don't practice). The Governor, who is an alleged religious man and a family man, seems to favor the economic argument; I do not see how his position is tenable under the circumstances. Yes, this is a complicated situation made worse by politics but....these are helpless children without parents and many want to simply "ship" them back to who knows where. Where are our Hoosier hearts? I thought the term Hoosier was synonymous with hospitable.

  3. Illegal aliens. Not undocumented workers (too young anyway). I note that this article never uses the word illegal and calls them immigrants. Being married to a naturalized citizen, these people are criminals and need to be deported as soon as humanly possible. The border needs to be closed NOW.

  4. Send them back NOW.

  5. deport now

ADVERTISEMENT