Last week, the Census reported that Massachusetts lost population for the second year in a row according to its estimates. While some people don't seem to think that this is a big deal, it is. Fewer people means less access to Federal funds, and fewer dollars for Massachusetts. When that happens, who do you think has to make up the revenue shortfall? A loss of a Congressional seat (or two!) not only means less clout in Congress, but also means that Massachusetts will lose electoral college votes -- while states like Texas increase their influence on the presidency. With less people, an economic recovery becomes even harder, as companies don't move jobs to places that are losing people, and without access to jobs, people leave creating a death spiral. There are already areas of this and neighboring states where this has happened at the local level and we certainly wouldn't want this pattern repeated on a statewide scale.
There are two things we should do to combat this. The first, and comparatively easier, course of action is to make sure that we have the most accurate count of residents possible. This is particularly challenging in a state where so many of the people here are students and immigrants -- two of the hardest groups to get a reliable count of. Holly St. Clair of the Metropolitan Area Planning Council has an opinion piece in today's Globe outlining the difficulties with getting accurate numbers. She gives the following recommendations for producing a more accurate count:
First, the Legislature and governor should reinstitute funding for the estimates and projections program, which can be managed by the UMass Donahue Institute, whose staff is highly qualified to handle this responsibility. Second, the secretary of state, colleges and universities, and community-based organizations with ties to immigrant communities must begin planning for the 2010 Census immediately. Cities such as Boston and Cambridge that have lots of students and immigrants need to be at the table, too.Of course, it's one thing to make sure that no one currently in Massachusetts is left out of the Census in 2010, but it's another thing entirely for the state to lure people here in advance of that count. It's going to be too late to do anything about that in a year or two, so it's particularly important for the state government to act now. This means that they have to address the high cost of living in the state. To my mind, that means increasing the affordable housing stock -- and by that I don't mean subsidized housing, I mean housing that an average couple can afford when they're looking to put down roots. That also means attracting jobs to the state -- something Governor Romney promised to do, but he has been less than mediocre at. These things have to go hand in hand, because companies won't relocate here if there's no place for their employees to live, and people won't move here if there's no place to work.
Of course, if you're like the Boston Herald Editors, you think that making sure people have access to health care will drive them away. That's a bit counter-intuitive, particularly since the kinds of jobs that we need to attract in Massachusetts are the ones that are the most likely to already offer health benefits -- associate level white collar type jobs that can lure recent graduates into staying put for a few more years. Massachusetts is well positioned to keep these people in state because there is always a new supply of students graduating from our excellent colleges and universities every year. They're leaving because of cold weather, a cold job market, and no place to live. We need to do a better job of holding on to these people, because that's where this state's future lies. Massachusetts can't compete globally for manufacturing jobs, so they need to keep as many knowledge workers in the area as possible so they can lure companies here with high-quality employees.
As an aside, around the same time my wife and I bought the .08 Acre Homestead in Watertown, we visited some of her relatives just outside of Charlotte, North Carolina. They lived in a mansion -- their garage alone was close to .08 acres -- in a community full of mansions with, they assured us, great schools, an easy commute to the city, and other sundry amenities. Down the street, a similar house was for sale -- used to Boston prices, we laughed about how we could be neighbors. When we took a look at the flyer, however, we saw that it was on the market for less than what our own shoebox on a postage stamp's original asking price was. One thing that we forget is that it's not just housing prices that are ridiculously high, but housing value is very low. You simply get more for your money elsewhere.
|