Forbes rankings have clout – and some surprises
Astronomers disowning planets. Hollywood casting out stars. Washington ranked 41st among the 50 states for quality of life. Just what in the name of this cosmos is going on here?
Well, seems defining quality of life is just about as difficult as defining a planet.
According to Forbes magazine, Washington ranked so poorly based on a combination of health, crime, cost of living, poverty rates and schools.
Overall, Washington did not fare too badly in the latest Forbes rankings of “The Best States for Business,” which was published in the Aug. 16 issue. The state settled in at No. 12, with the quality of life factor and business costs (37th) the major negatives. Washington did well, fifth, in rankings for labor, growth prospects and — shockingly — regulatory environment. We finished in the middle of the pack, 26th, for economic climate.
Idaho did well, sixth overall, racking up its worst score on — shockingly — regulatory environment (34th) and best on economic climate (second). The state ranked 13th on business costs, 16th on labor, 22nd on growth prospects and 20th on quality of life. The last is almost certainly a reflection on low education spending.
Why care? After all, unlike the exile of Pluto and the deposing of Tom Cruise, rankings come along all the time. Year-to-year movements are as much sideways as up and down.
Well, Washington business cares. A new report from the Washington Alliance for a Competitive Economy cites consistently poor rankings from important general and trade publications as a sign the state must get its economic house in order.
“These well-known and highly regarded publications … confirm perceptions often shared by business leaders here: Washington is a high-cost state in a nation characterized by intense interstate competition for new business expansion and location,” says the brief entitled “Consolidating Gains in a Transitional Economy.”
The 18-page document reviews Washington’s economic performance over the past 15 years. Much is familiar: Boeing Co.’s ups and downs, the dot-com bust, the shift from manufacturing to services. The state has recovered nicely from the 2000-2001 slump, but ACE warns we should start preparing for the next downturn in the business cycle, with last week’s miserable housing numbers signaling trouble ahead. Construction has been a pillar of the post-Sept. 11 recovery nationally and in Washington.
The recommendations are also familiar: control state spending and regulatory impulses; upgrade Puget Sound-area ports, roads and bridges; assure adequate supplies of reliable, low-cost energy; and pay more attention to Washington’s schools, colleges and K-12 alike.
It’s not as if we are standing still.
Under governors Gary Locke and Chris Gregoire, state government has made progress achieving more fiscal discipline, but revenue surpluses the past few years have put off the day hard choices will have to be made. Regulation, Forbes’ opinion aside, certainly remains an issue.
Port upgrades earned a nod last week from The New York Times. King County ground transportation, however, is a train wreck. From monorail to Alaskan Way Viaduct to State Route 520 over Lake Washington, paralysis prevails. The whole state needs to get goods moved through the bottlenecks.
Washington, like the rest of the West, suffered badly during the 2000-2001 electricity crisis, but the state’s utilities have since then substantially improved their generation and transmission assets. ACE’s concerns regarding over-reliance on conservation, and possible voter passage of a renewable fuels initiative, are misplaced.
Education remains a challenge. Washington imports much of the talent needed by high-tech industry because the state’s campuses have too few seats. Students and their parents are shouldering an ever-greater share of costs. The Washington Assessment of Student Learning, or WASL, continues to show weakness in math performance. We must do better.
Fortunately, we can take solace in our quality of life, Forbes’ conclusions notwithstanding.