April 30, 1992
The Hartford Courant
Connecticut has lost more than 155,000 jobs in the past three years- nearly 10 percent of all jobs in the state. Huge further losses in defense, aerospace and insurance still lie ahead. No doubt that’s why state officials have proposed a $1 billion program- the largest in the country- to aid Connecticut businesses. Economic Development Commissioner Joseph J. McGee calls this “a critical period to take a breath and figure out growth policies for the 90’s.”
I propose a strategy designed not just to throw money at economic problems but to rebuild Connecticut:
* Use public resources to meet public needs. Inadequate public investment has left roads, bridges, public transportation, housing stock and sewers in shambles. The social infrastructure is equally devastated. Despite having the country’s highest per-capita income, Connecticut faces deteriorating education and epidemics of AIDS and drug addiction. The state has three of the country’s 10 poorest cities. Rivers, shoreline, land and air are polluted, and Connecticut contributes far more than its share of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming.
If there is mass unemployment while basic needs go unmet, what the state must do is obvious: use human and material resources to meet these needs. The state’s economic-development effort should improve housing, education, health, transportation, manufacturing and the environment.
For example, city and state governments should begin programs to hire some of the thousands of unemployed construction workers to build affordable housing- and thus also make the state more attractive to business. They should start building an intercity light-rail system, which will cut commuting time, reduce the major source of air pollution and allow more productive location of workplaces, housing and services. Similarly, they should invest in energy conservation- from weatherization to cogeneration- to create jobs, develop work-force skills, reduce pollution and cut energy bills.
*Empower the grass roots. Most people are rightly leery of thoughtlessly expanding the role of government in the economy. As those on the right contend, government bureaucracies tend to develop their own interests apart from the public interest. And as those on the left argue, governments often become captives of the wealthiest and most powerful private interests.
That doesn’t mean the economy should be laisez-fair- for the market, like government, is now failing to meet most people’s needs. Rather both government and the market should be used to empower people at the grass roots.
State development funds should target enterprises accountable to people in their own communities, such as enterprises run by nonprofit developers, cooperatives, local governments and community-based organizations.
Such organizations have been responsible for a large proportion of affordable housing built in the past decade; they should now be encouraged to address other community needs as well. The community and employee-owned Valley Care Cooperative in Waterbury, for example, employs low-income, inner-city women to provide home-care services for individuals and government-funded programs.
*Build productive capability. Government programs should develop work-force skills, along the lines of the Cleveland project in which skilled construction workers , while building and rehabilitating affordable housing, simultaneously train unemployed youth. State government should encourage flexible manufacturing networks through which small companies cooperate to develop capabilities they are unable to attain alone.
*Equalize opportunity. Public investment should be targeted to help the urban jobless rebuild impoverished cities. That will also help implement the State Plan for Conservation and Development, which maintains that “concentrating new development in or near exiting urban areas is essential to maintaining a healthy environment and limiting infrastructure costs.”
*Increase regional synergy. The state should encourage enterprises that meet the needs of local and regional markets. A good example is the recent program that helps state institutions and welfare recipients. buy Connecticut-grown farm products.
*Require performance guarantees. Too often Connecticut has given companies subsidies- only to have the companies take the money and run. The state needs an equivalent to the recent Indiana law requiring companies that receive tax abatements or financial aid to deliver on what they promise.
Enterprises receiving public subsidies should be required by contract to create decent jobs, upgrade the work force, improve the environment and create markets for other local producers.