With two of his key advisers becoming available, having recently left the Gingrich campaign, Texas Governor Rick Perry is reconsidering something that he once dismissed — a run for the presidency.
Perry was reluctant to run for the nomination without key advisers, including his former campaign manager Rob Johnson and his top political consultant Dave Carney, both of whom were working on the presidential campaign of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.
Johnson and Carney announced their resignations from the Gingrich campaign Thursday as part of a huge shake-up of the organization.
But now, according to CBS News, he's serious about a run for the White House. And one thing he's got going for him is his record in Texas. He's been the governor there since 2000, and while the nation's economy has been limping along for the past four years, Texas is open for business.
Using Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data, Dallas Fed economists looked at state-by-state employment changes since June 2009, when the recession ended. Texas added 265,300 net jobs, out of the 722,200 nationwide, and by far outpaced every other state. New York was second with 98,200, Pennsylvania added 93,000, and it falls off from there. Nine states created fewer than 10,000 jobs, while Maine, Hawaii, Delaware and Wyoming created fewer than 1,000. Eighteen states have lost jobs since the recovery began.
The data are even more notable because they're calculated on a "sum of states" basis, which the BLS does not use because they can have sampling errors. Using straight nonfarm payroll employment, Texas accounts for 45% of net U.S. job creation. Modesty is not typically considered a Texas virtue, but the results speak for themselves.
Texas is also among the few states that are home to more jobs than when the recession began in December 2007.
Richard Fisher, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, believes he understands why Texas has done so much better than the rest of the country.
Mr. Fisher argues that Texas is doing so well relative to other states precisely because it has rejected the economic model that now prevails in Washington...
...Texas stands out for its free market and business-friendly climate.
Capital—both human and investment—is highly mobile, and it migrates all the time to the places where the opportunities are larger and the burdens are lower. Texas has no state income tax. Its regulatory conditions are contained and flexible. It is fiscally responsible and government is small. Its right-to-work law doesn't impose unions on businesses or employees. It is open to global trade and competition: Houston, San Antonio and El Paso are entrepôts for commerce, especially in the wake of the North American Free Trade Agreement.
Based on his conversations with CEOs and other business leaders, Mr. Fisher says one of Texas's huge competitive advantages is its ongoing reform of the tort system, which has driven litigation costs to record lows. He also cited a rule in place since 1998 in the backwash of the S&L debacle that limits mortgage borrowing to 80% of the appraised value of a home. Like a minimum down payment, this reduces overleveraging and means Texas wasn't hurt as badly by the housing crash as other states.
Governor Perry would make a formidable opponent for President Obama. Voters comparing Perry's accomplishments in Texas to Obama's failures at the national level would have an easy choice.
I don't Trust Perry. He worked like a dog to build a north-south toll road through the state called the Trans-Texas Corridor. His people selected an unauditable Mexican company to build, manage and own the highway. The public outrage killed the project in the legislature, but it somehow feels like it still has a spark of life. Kind of like cap-and-trade legislation from Obama.
He also refused to support Arizona's efforts at immigration control when he had the chance. I'd vote for him against Obama, but I think he is pure politician, in the most negative sense of the word.
Posted by: PJ Smith | June 10, 2011 at 10:48 AM
You're more knowledgeable about Perry than I am, PJ, and your assessment of him being a politician first and foremost seems pretty realistic. But Texas has been doing pretty well under his governorship. Perry vs. Obama would not be a difficult decision.
Posted by: Tom Bowler | June 10, 2011 at 02:19 PM
From Wikipedia on the Texas Legislature... a clue to Texas' success:
The Legislature meets in regular session on the second Tuesday in January of each odd-numbered year. The Texas Constitution limits the regular session to 140 calendar days.
Texas has no state income tax, a low cost of living, decent rural lifestyles, little smog, polite people and a lot more to recommend it. I moved here in 2003 from southern California and I'm content.
Perry hasn't succeeded in ruining the state, nor has he tried to to my knowledge, with the possible exception of that highway project which smells like dead squid in the sun. Nevertheless, he strikes me as one of those politicians who has no reluctance to use power whenever it suits him in pursuit of his own ends.
With George Bush, what you saw was pretty much real. I never have that feeling with Perry. That said, I'd vote for pretty much anyone against Obama. We'll see what the future hands us.
Posted by: PJ Smith | June 11, 2011 at 07:14 PM
"That said, I'd vote for pretty much anyone against Obama."
Can't argue with that. I think some liberal pundits are engaging in wishful thinking, imagining that the Tea Party might abandon a Republican nominee on ideological grounds in favor of a third party candidate. They're dreaming. Everybody thinks as you do.
Posted by: Tom Bowler | June 13, 2011 at 02:16 PM