Photograph by Bernard Pollack
Last night Gov. Jay Nixon gave his annual State of the State address, his last before the next election. Nixon touched on some of the hardships Missouri has faced in the last year, including the Joplin tornado, and the need for budget cuts and growing jobs, particularly with his new “Missouri Works” initiative to bring in more auto industry jobs to the state. This morning, David Robertson, political science professor at the University of Missouri-St. Louis, talked to us about the speech and what it might mean for St. Louis:
What were some of the key statements Nixon made last night?
He emphasized the importance of jobs, which he and every other state governor in the United States need to do. He had several ideas about what the government can do to help the situation. Some notable things he didn’t mention were Medicaid and the China cargo hub, and instead he focused more on auto production and supply. He spent less time talking about what’s going to be cut and what’s going to be done and more time talking about marketing Missouri exports. Nixon emphasized that the state needs to find ways to balance the budget without raising taxes and mentioned some things that need to be done more “efficiently,” which is a code word that means do as much as you used to do but with less money.
Nixon mentioned numerous cuts to higher education and called them “tough but necessary.” Coming from higher education, what do you think are the possible ramifications of those cuts?
Many states have experienced pretty deep cuts already. It seems to be a bigger cut than we’ve seen if it goes through. One thing that’s important to remember is that higher education is a long-term investment, and in a period of crisis, people and the government tend to put off long-term investments. One of the drawbacks if these cuts go into the bone of higher education rather than the fat is that long-term investments are important for economic prosperity. This period across the country is going to challenge the United States to ensure that the competitive advantage we’ve had with higher education stays intact. In the next 30 years, we might see much stronger competition in higher education with other countries, like China and Brazil.
Nixon has been talking recently about his “Missouri Works” plan to bring more auto industry jobs to Missouri. Is there a precedence or history of success for plans like this in other states?
There has been a lot of state competition to attract new automobile investments. The state of Missouri has been important in auto producing and has lost a good number of automobile jobs over the course of the last 10 years. Like Michigan, we’ve been hurt by the economic downturn. The hope is to ensure that the jobs that are here won’t leave, restore some jobs by restoring shifts, and to make sure those industries that are important to the automobile plants have strong incentives to grow those investments. Nixon is going to get some pushback from those in the state legislature who are concerned about Moberly, after state money was invested there and the jobs didn’t turn up. The incentives given to different auto industry companies seem like they’ll be specifically tailored to the individual, so we’ll have to wait and see how that plays out.
What are some effects of his proposed budget cuts and “Missouri Works” plan that we might see locally?
The efforts to maintain and restore auto jobs in the St. Louis region are big. These are normally relatively high-paying jobs, especially in the main auto plants, and our capacity is down considerably. We’ve torn down some plants and now the Hazelwood plant is functioning for Ford. It’s like nurturing seeds after severely mowing the grass. It’s going to take awhile for the lawn to come back in.
Also, the health industry is very important in the country and in St. Louis. There are efforts to encourage growth in the health sector, like with high-tech jobs, but at the same time the health sector can be a big generator for increases in government costs. State governments have proposed a number of things that don’t cost the state budget much money, like expanding required coverage for autism, but get a lot of attention. Whatever we do at the state level will pale in comparison to federal costs, like Medicare.
How does the period we’re in now compare to other periods of financial distress in the state?
We’re in a very partisan period, and one of the things Nixon emphasized was bi-partisanship. It’s true that we’ve seen a little more cooperation, but the special session recently suggested that there might be a limit to bi-partisan cooperation. Nixon is the kind of governor that Missouri tends to like—a middle-of-the-road, fiscally conservative guy who isn’t rocking the boat too much. In addition to addressing urban issues, he’s been emphasizing the importance of rural areas, which is important to democratic governors, who have lost some support in rural areas during the past 30 years. I think the tone of the address was well suited to the state. Missouri, like all other states, is facing challenges in making long-term investments in things like highways and higher education. It’s interesting how Nixon compared Missouri to states like Kansas and Nebraska rather than Illinois or Ohio. I can see possible controversy in the extent to which Nixon compares Missouri to rural states.
