Committee of 82. Entrepreneurism is key to reviving failing communities

Iowans were treated by the U.S. Census Bureau with another dose of economic bad medicine recently. The Bureau’s report noted that, since the year 2000, only North Dakota and West Virginia have grown more slowly than Iowa.

We, Iowa parents of college-aged kids, know all too well that our best and brightest continue to flee for lands of opportunity elsewhere. Yet those of us who have pledged our futures here love this land between two great rivers.

So what’s wrong with Iowa? We all have this gnawing feeling that we’re not the state we used to be or want to be.

Despite the rapid urbanization of some portions of our state, it’s clear that the heart, and soul, and a majority of our people remain in what most would call rural areas. But it is precisely these areas of Iowa that are stressed the most. And where is the agenda to turn them around – to make them grow again?

We’ve had plenty of people selling various elixirs to save the soul of our rural areas – everything from lasers to Belgian endive has been suggested at one time or another. But what works? What will cure what ails Iowa?

Those are the first questions a non-profit organization called the Committee of 82 — for the 82 non-urban counties in Iowa – has set out to answer. It’s a think tank by Iowans for Iowans. And it’s mission is as simple as an Iowa farmer fixing a piece of machinery: find out what works and then do it.

So here is what the Committee has done so far. We’ve hired some of the smartest researchers at our universities to develop an index to measure the economic vitality and growth of every county in Iowa and our neighboring states. (See attached map explaining the rankings.)

Then we’ve asked these researchers to get their computers humming by isolating the key factors that, all other things being equal, are related to either a growing or declining county.

And, while our work is far from done, we want to tell Iowans what we’ve found so far. Here’s a sampling:

* Counties should focus on growing family incomes; the growth in income of a county’s residents will lead to most of the amenities we want for a higher quality of life. It starts with higher incomes for Iowans.

* On the whole, Iowa performs at the average among our neighbors, slightly better than Illinois, but not as well as Wisconsin, Minnesota, and especially South Dakota.

* Counties that saw a significant increase in farm program payments saw a significant reduction in growth. On the other hand, counties with an increase in livestock sales had more growth. Sioux County, for example, particularly benefits from its livestock receipts.

* The faster the rise in local taxes, the greater the decrease in county growth. You tax more, you get less. Increasing transfer payments and those over 65 years old was also strongly related to slower growth.

* Counties with commuters traveling over 30 minutes to work showed some of the strongest economic performance. People want to live in rural areas, but they need access to a good job and are willing to drive to get one.

* Counties that saw an increase in the number of non-farm businesses had significantly more growth. Locally-owned small businesses and a county’s economic well-being are closely related.

* Finally, areas with outdoor recreation amenities, lakes, bikepaths and parks, grew faster than those without them. These amenities appear to actually generate growth.

After looking at dozens and dozens of factors, those discussed above are the most significantly related to either a growing or declining county. That’s what we know promotes or hinders growth.

So what do we do about it? We need to use it to fix the machinery of Iowa; to take what works and develop an economic development agenda for rural Iowa that’s based on fact, not fiction, pragmatism not ideology, common sense not the latest fad. We need to make this work for every Iowa county that wants to make a difference.

And now we’ve set out to do just that.

The Committee of 82 has commissioned six separate studies to follow up on these findings to help us develop an agenda for growth that’s proven to work.

We’re looking at the economics of local taxes and how we can restructure them to drive, not hinder growth. Rural counties in other countries have creatively used brands and specialized marketing to differentiate their agricultural products. We plan to determine if that can be successfully done in Iowa, too. And we are studying how the current federal commodity programs sap the life out of many rural counties and whether the federal government can help create a differentiated agriculture in Iowa without destroying our asset base or our way of life.

We know livestock represents real economic value to rural Iowa. But how can Iowa use its comparative advantage in livestock production to make the growth of livestock farmers, large and small, socially, environmentally and politically acceptable? We plan to try to find out.

How can we drive up the number of locally, owned businesses and develop more recreational amenities in Iowa? Why, for example, are the Army Corps of Engineer lakes in Iowa off limits to development when Missouri and South Dakota have used them as engines for development. Those questions, too, will be answered.

And we will examine state policies of our neighboring states like South Dakota, Wisconsin, and Minnesota that are proven to promote growth and see if they make sense for Iowa. We Iowans are practical people. When we have a problem at home or at work, we don’t select a Republican or Democrat solution; we don’t select a rural or urban answer; we pick whatever works to get the job done.

The same attitude needs to imbue our public policy decisionmaking. The Committee of 82 plans to find out what works for Iowa and let Iowans know about it. And then we can start making all parts of Iowa work again, before it’s too late.

By Doug Gross
Chairman, Committee of 82

http://www.committeeof82.org/about.html

(Many thanks to Jack Schultz of Boomtown USA http://boomtownusa.blogspot.com/ for bringing this to our attention. Russ)

***

Subsidies for farms are not assured

Fed bank official: World trade talks, the deficit and taxpayer angst threaten their continuation

By Dawn House
The Salt Lake Tribune

U.S. taxpayer angst, a yawning federal deficit and world trade talks might be forming a perfect storm that could reduce or eliminate farm subsidies, a Federal Reserve bank official said during an economic conference on Friday.

Although such a whirlwind probably will not touch down, something approaching those possibilities must be considered, said Mark Drabenstott, director for the bank’s Center for the Study of Rural America in Kansas City.

Full Story: http://www.sltrib.com/business/ci_3474767