A stark indicator of the extent of Oklahoma’s job losses over the past year is the state’s Unemployment Insurance (UI) Trust Fund account. Going into 2009, the Trust Fund enjoyed a very healthy balance of $824 million. Now, twelve months later, the balance has fallen by 40 percent to $489 million. In 2009, the OESC (Oklahoma Employment Security Commission) paid out $559 million in regular UI  benefits, an all-time record and almost four times the amount paid in 2007.

Read the rest of this entry »

Our October edition of Numbers You Need is now out, providing a snapshot of economic and budget trends in Oklahoma through monthly data on jobs, inflation, public benefits, and state revenues, as well as the most recent quarterly data on building permits and an annual update on the poverty rate. Read the rest of this entry »

This is the second of two blog posts on rural poverty by Mariah Levison, a graduate student in International Affairs at Washington University in St. Louis, based on a presentation that Oklahoma Policy Institute gave last month at McCurtain Memorial Hospital in Idabel. In our initial post, Mariah summarized some of the data and theories on the causes of poverty in McCurtain County. Here she examines the research on amenities based development as a strategy for addressing rural poverty. Read the rest of this entry »

If  you did not see last Sunday’s Tulsa World, it is well worth checking out their front-page profile of families hit by the economic downturn, titled “Faces of the Recession”. Reporters Ginnie Graham and Mike Averill tell the stories of six families hit by job losses who are doing everything in their capacities to stay afloat in these rough financial waters. The article is particularly compelling in portraying how the recession is hitting families that were formerly anchored in the middle class, leading many to seek out assistance from government, private charities, and family members to put food on the table and a roof over their heads. For those seeking assistance for the first time, in particular, the state’s 211 Helpline service (the link is to Tulsa 211, one of six regional centers that cover the state) is invaluable in helping connect families in need with social service providers who are available to lend a hand.

A story  in USA Today, “Oklahoma City defies recession,” focuses on OKC as the city with the 2nd lowest unemployment rate in the country. In response to questions about OKC’s secret to success, Roy Williams of the OKC Chamber said it is

Luck, as much as anything. We’re doing the right things, in the right place, at the right time.

At least one of the “right things” that Williams refers to includes investing in the community. The story focuses on what happened in OKC when a 4-million square foot GM plant closed. The closure of an auto plant hardly makes OKC unique. What the people of OKC did next is what distinguishes us.

Voters agreed to pay $55 million for the GM property and lease it to the military. The military is investing about $100 million over five years to convert the plant. “We’re hiring right now,” [Air Force Col. Randall] Burke says.

This was just one in a long string of projects which voters in OKC agreed to fund to improve the community. Starting with the Metropolitan Area Projects (MAPS), which was narrowly approved by voters in 1993, the city has been able to invest in improving quality of life, schools, and even the economic landscape of OKC..

All of this makes me think as I read a quote from Mayor Cornett in the article which has the same humble sentiment as Roy Williams’.

Oklahoma City tried to become a hub for manufacturing airplanes, expanding on the aerospace industry that surrounds the Air Force base. Then comes the recession. People don’t buy new planes. They repair what they’ve got. Oklahoma City does repair and overhaul. Voilà! Better be lucky than smart.

I can’t help but think that this humbleness displayed by Mayor Cornett and by Roy Williams may be misplaced. I am not saying that there was no luck involved, but sometimes you create your own luck. The voters of OKC gave Williams and Mayor Cornett the ammunition they needed to make good things happen in OKC and the ability to capitalize on “opportunities” (isn’t that what consultants tell us to call challenges now?). The voters of OKC deserve credit for being forward thinking enough to invest in our community, which is smart. I hope we keep the progress going when it comes time for the next MAPS initiative.

So, is it better to be lucky than smart? Who knows? It looks as if the people of OKC have made some smart decisions and had a little luck on our side too. Would it be too boastful to think that we are both lucky and smart?

Note – Occasionally we plan to re-run blog posts on topical subjects that you may have missed the first time around. Recently, the Annie E. Casey released its annual Kids Count report measuring how states are faring on a range of indicators of child well-being . As the Tulsa World reported, Oklahoma’s overall ranking dropped to 44th  and we fared worse on 6 of 9 indicators than we did in 2000.  In this June blog post, we examined the disparity between our state’s growing wealth and persistently poor performance on measures of personal and social well-being.

Back in March, the Bureau of Economic Analysis released 2008 data on state personal income, which is the most widely used measure of a state’s relative prosperity. We took note of it at the time in our April Numbers You Need bulletin, focusing on Oklahoma’s rank as the state with the fourth strongest rate of growth in  personal income (5.4 percent) for the year.

Perhaps the bigger story, which hasn’t received much attention,  is that the state’s strong economic growth over the course of this decade has propelled Oklahoma from near the bottom to the middle rungs of states in per capita personal income. As recently as 2000, Oklahoma ranked 42nd in state per capita personal income at $23,582. Between 2000 and 2008, Oklahoma’s per capita personal income jumped 51.2 percent, fourth among the states behind only Wyoming, Louisiana,  and North Dakota (all, not coincidentally, states that have shared in the boom in mineral prices of recent years). As of 2008, Oklahoma ranks 28th with per capita personal income of $36,899, which is less than $3,000 below the national average of  $39,751. Oklahoma ranks above every southern state except Florida and Texas, and has surged past not only declining Rust Belt states like Ohio (32nd), Michigan (34th)and Indiana (39th), but also such seemingly dynamic southern and western states as Oregon (31st), North Carolina (36th), Georgia (40th) and Arizona (42nd). Read the rest of this entry »

The Oklahoman recently ran an editorial calling attention to the especially heavy toll that the current recession is having on male workers nationally and here in Oklahoma. A new issue brief from Economic Policy Institute, using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Current Population Survey, provides some startling state-level data that bears out this point.

In the 4th quarter of 2007, which marked the onset of the national recession, Oklahoma’s unemployment rate was 3.4 percent for men and 4.2 percent for women. In the just-completed 2nd quarter of 2009, while the female unemployment rate had inched up a mere 0.2 percentage points to 4.6 percent, the male unemployment rate had soared 4.2 percentage points to 7.6 percent. Thus,  over a span of eighteen months, the job market switched from one where women were somewhat likelier than men to be unemployed to one where the male unemployment rate is a full three percentage points higher than that of women.

Oklahoma’s gender profile mirrors the national picture but in somewhat more extreme form.  Nationally, unemployment rates for females at the start of the recession were 0.2 percentage points higher than for males (4.9 percent compared to 4.7 percent), a smaller gender gap than in Oklahoma. Today, the male unemployment rate for men nationally is 3 percentage points higher for men than for women (10.7 percent compared to 7.7 percent), the same size gap as in Oklahoma.

The Oklahoman’s explanation for what has happened is persuasive and is echoed by others who have reported on the subject :

The recession is hitting hardest on sectors over which men have traditionally dominated — construction, heavy manufacturing, mining, etc. — and hitting the lightest on sectors where women have traditionally ruled — education, health care, government service.

Looking ahead, the gender gap is expected to worsen as unemployment levels remain high over the next year. EPI’s report includes projections for the 2nd quarter of 2010, when economic forecasters expect unemployment to peak. They predict Oklahoma’s unemployment rate will rise to 7.3 percent for all workers; for men, unemployment is projected to be 9.0 percent (a 1.2 percentage point increase from 2009), compared to 5.3 percent for women (a 0.7 percentage point increase from 2009).

EPI’s report also shows that ethnic minorities – African Americans and Hispanics – are being hurt worse than Whites during the downturn and that these disparities will also worsen over the next year. Due to inadequate sample sizes, EPI was unable to provide estimates of unemployment rates by ethnicity for Oklahoma.

The loss of male jobs during this downturn is likely to have far-reaching consequences for the economy, communities, and families that will take a long time to fully understand and address. Will we see  more men move into traditionally female occupations in the education and health care sectors? Will we see shifts in family formation and child-rearing roles if more women become the primary breadwinners? Let’s hope that policymakers start soon to think about these questions and begin to think about crafting solutions to ensure that the economy that emerges out of this downturn is one that provides opportunities for all.

Matt Miller, writing for the TPM Book Club on a new book by Justin Fox called The Myth of the Rational Market,  provides a thoughtful reformulation of  the “government vs markets” debate:

…we’re too often peddled a phony choice between “big government” and “free markets.” A wise society should be looking to find the right balance of both to serve its goals – and asking private and public sectors to focus on what each does (or could do) best. Government should set the right “rules of the game” in terms of creating incentives within which competition, greed and so forth work their invisible hand magic. Government is also good at cutting checks, so income supports like Social Security that serve social goals make great sense. And only government can make the public investments that support growth (via infrastructure, basic R & D, etc). The private sector is good at creatively optimizing financial outcomes whatever the rules may be, and at innovating endlessly to offer better products and services at lower prices. Most of our political life is the story of the fight over the proper balance between these forces in intelligent governance…

I might add that the opposite of “anti-government” isn’t “pro-government”. It’s better government.