By Tom Sgouros in
RIFuture.org
In
a world where self-described “leaders” show their “leadership” largely by
describing it in press releases, and politicians routinely praise their own
bold choices, it is refreshing to see one who actually lives up to his own
billing.
Anthony
Gemma, on the other hand, has a jobs plan that is indeed as “innovative,
strategic, and transparent” as he says. Unfortunately it’s also silly,
misguided, and occasionally bizarre. (And hard to find. Go look on his
home page and wait until you see “Enough is enough” and click on that.)
The centerpiece of his plan is to nurture the growth of
the “wellness” industry in Rhode Island. This includes businesses who produce
dietary supplements and organic foods, as well as “wellness jobs that include
personal trainers, aerobics and pilates instructors, managers, researchers, Web
site designers, wellness and fitness writers, and dietitians.”
Well all right, then. Maybe it sounds goofy, but could it
work?
 |
| Anthony Gemma wants to create more jobs for massage therapists |
Sadly, probably not. Here’s a little economics lesson for
you. What Rhode Island sorely needs is not goods and services to sell to other
Rhode Islanders, but things to sell to the rest of the nation or the rest of
the world. Do we currently suffer from a shortage of Pilates instructors?
Are there aerobics classes that can’t run because no instructor can be
hired? If we had more personal trainers could we sell them to people in
Kentucky or India? These are services that are not in short supply, and
are really no good for export, either.
Ok,
how about the nutritional supplement part of the mix? This would
presumably trade on our lack of strength in this sector. So far as I can tell,
as far as nutrition companies go, Rhode Island is home only to Edesia Global Nutrition
Solutions, an international effort aimed at distributing nutritional
supplements to starving kids. Edesia is a very cool organization, and sells
teddy bears to support its mission. Though I can imagine it could be the seed
for a thriving food industry here, it’s not exactly what Gemma was talking
about. (Read about them here.)
So in other words, Gemma is proposing to grow an industry
where what we have can’t be exported and what can be exported, we don’t have.
Leveraging assets we don’t have seems an interesting approach to economic
development. So you have to award points for originality, in exactly the same
way you’d praise the architect who envisions a fountain in the desert before
anyone has dug the first well. Exactly like that.
Bettering that, Gemma proposes that we encourage the Mayo
Clinic or Tufts Medical to open wellness clinics here. This, of course, would
be the opposite of exporting goods. Instead of bringing money into the state,
we’d be sending it away, to Minnesota or Massachusetts to provide services that
we can get in-state. This, again, is why success in business means little or
nothing about success in making policy to benefit a whole state.
Too late, too little
There’s a section in this plan talking about how higher
education should be demand-driven and responsive to the needs of businesses and
students. That’s a great idea. So great, it was pretty much incorporated into
the “CCRI 21st Century Workforce Commission” report from a couple of years ago.
(Gemma also suggests asking the state’s 7 biggest employers for $250,000 apiece
to shore up education at CCRI. Which is a funny thought: we can’t raise taxes
on businesses, but we can demand contributions from them?)
Along the same lines, there’s a four item list on page 9,
that describes what the state should do to encourage the growth of the wellness
industry. What’s funny about the list is that the first three items on it — tax
credits, loans, assistance finding federal money — are all things the state
already does. So yes, these are good ideas. So good that someone already
implemented them.
And then there’s this:
“It is incumbent upon us to eliminate the over-regulation
of the small businesses which are the engines that drive the Rhode Island
economy. I will create a workgroup to review all federal and state regulations
that hinder wellness and health-oriented businesses…” [p.8]
This, presumably, would join the Secretary of State’s
workgroup, and the legislative commissions and the Governor’s initiatives of
years past. Courtesy of the Secretary of State’s office, this work is under
way, and it’s hard to find anyone to disagree with the claim.
Honestly, you don’t have to find disagreement to
understand why these things — streamlining, increased efficiencies, and so on —
often don’t get done. People who crave simple answers will blame unions and
fear of change, but it’s pretty easy to find deeper reasons.
In my experience, you can walk around any town hall or
state building and find people who agree that there are efficiencies available,
but don’t have the resources to re-tool their department’s operations. “Doing
more with less” year after year leaves little room for designing new procedures
or implenting new systems.
When you walk into a tax assessor’s office and find
the assessor trying to finish reports that her staff used to prepare, you’ve
found someone who can’t afford to research or entertain new possibilities about
the conduct of her department’s business.
For better and worse, that’s how we
run things these days. Studies and commissions are all well and good, but
change requires resources, even when the change makes things more efficient.
You’ve got to put something in to get more out.
So that’s what I learned by reading the Gemma Jobs plan:
he suggests concentrating on a new industry that has approximately zero
potential to bring new money into the state, and offers a bunch of other
suggestions that are already in place. What’s more, almost all of his plan
consists of state policy suggestions, while the last time I checked, he is
running for federal office.
There’s plenty more, but I’ve piled on enough. Ok,
sorry, one thing more. I have to share my favorite part. It’s a tax incentive
on page 9, for people who get hired in the wellness industry. Seriously. Gemma
would offer a tax credit to new employees. Really? Does he imagine that
unemployed people need a tax incentive to help them find jobs? That would be
the sound of the fountain designer who has finally been persuaded to help dig a
well and shows up to work with a butterfly net.
So sure. Gemma is a smart energetic guy who has done good
things in the past, and doubtless will again in the future. I just don’t want a
congressman with judgment like this. His jobs plan is certainly “innovative,
strategic, and transparent” as he says. But is there no place for “practical,”
“sensible,” or “realistic?”
Tom Sgouros
is a freelance engineer, policy analyst, and
writer. Reach him at ripr@whatcheer.net. Buy his book, "Ten Things You
Don't Know About Rhode Island" at whatcheer.net