Why Does the Union Leader Hate New Hampshire?

by: Michael Marsh

Tue Apr 14, 2009 at 09:06:50 AM EDT

Monday's Union Leader contained an editorial headlined "Stupid solutions: Gov. Lynch is right", railing against the NH House's actions last week on the budget, particularly reinstating the estate tax and establishing a capital gains tax. Part of the UL opinionist's argument was based on a report from the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) on state competitiveness. The report rated NH poorly, saying we were the 37th most competitive state, behind such go-go locations as Mississippi, Alabama, and Arkansas. This got my attention, because it made no sense. If there's one thing I know, it's that we do not want to be more like those godforsaken states! So I spent a few minutes taking a look at the ALEC report to see what gives.

ALEC exists so that radical right-wing legislators can go to conventions, have a few drinks, rub shoulders with each other, and talk about gun rights, cutting taxes, and defense of marriage amendments. When these guys attend a meeting of serious legislators, they are politely listened to and then just as politely ignored. ALEC gives them a place to pass resolutions condemning raising taxes, climate change, and evolution. Of course, New Hampshire is well represented at their meetings.

And the report, entitled "Rich States, Poor States" that was quoted in the Union Leader? The sub-title gives it away- "ALEC-Laffer State Economic Competitiveness Index". Laffer refers to Arthur Laffer, the supply-side "economist" who was the "brains" of the Reagan tax revolution.  He is the author of the Laffer Curve, which "proved", to weak minds anyway, that the more you cut the tax rate the more taxes you raise. The fact that this failed to work again and again and again has not prevented Mr. Laffer from being the darling of the anti-government crowd.

Anyway, the ALEC report says the outlook for our state is dark and dreary. It deduces this based on a number of indices which are dubious, to say the least. For example, our state debt service ratio is too high. Our minimum wage is too high. Worker's comp costs are too high, and we are not a Right-to-work state. I question whether any of these have the slightest real impact on our competitiveness, but they are all issues that are near and dear to ALEC, so they become part of the analysis.

According to Arthur Laffer's criteria, here are some of the states that are more competitive than us: Florida (nickname: the Foreclosure State), Nevada (nickname: the Least Safe State), Arizona (nickname: the Other Foreclosures State) , South Dakota, Arkansas, Louisiana, Tennessee, Alabama (nickname: The Hellhole State), Mississippi (nickname: Hey, We're the Real Hellhole because We're Much Worse than Alabama State), South Carolina, and (this will surprise you because it sure as hell surprised me) West-by-God Virginia and Michigan! All are better places to run businesses, according to Mr. Laffer's secret formula. Mr. Laffer seemingly says this with a straight face, by the way, scolding New Hampshire: "We worry, however, that increasingly New Hampshire is catching the Northeast diseases. As more and more Massachusetts refugees move there, the politics of the state are shifting to the left." Oh, dear.

A normal person would react to the assininity of the ranking results by saying "something is wrong with my rating system". But Arthur Laffer, and ALEC, and by extension the Union Leader's opinionist, are not normal people. They are cultists. They worship at the altar of small government. So when reality doesn't align with their beliefs, reality has to change. That's why they believe New Hampshire is a less desirable place to live and start a business than Mississippi. Luckily for us, in the real world inhabited by real people who actually start real companies, their silliness is ignored. So we will do OK.

Now, if only the Union Leader didn't hate New Hampshire so much, and would just stop lying about us...