Why Irish Eyes Are Smiling

By Scott R. Cooper, Crook County Judge
published in the Central Oregonian, November 2004

The Irish Economic Miracle Has Lessons For Oregon

When you think about economic development, perhaps the last place you think of is Ireland—that little island off the west coast of England on the other side of the Atlantic. But think again: recently events in that the tiny republic may well offer a roadmap to economic vitality for our own state.

In Europe, Ireland is referred to as the Celtic Tiger. It got that nickname as a result of the phenomenal growth the Irish economy has experienced in the past five years. I had an opportunity to see that growth up close during a 9-day vacation around the country in September.

What I saw looked familiar.

The Irish Republic covers 27,135 square miles. It’s about one third the size of Oregon. Its principle features are mountains, plains, valleys and coasts. The primary color is green (except when it’s gray, which is most of the time because it rains every day.) As nations go, Ireland is young. Although it has been inhabited for thousands of years, the Irish state only organized political independence from Great Britain in 1916. The population is young, too. The average age is 26. In total, 3.9 million people live in Oregon, compared to Ireland’s 3.5 million. About a third of the population lives in a single city (Dublin.) Employees work principally in agriculture (8 percent), industry (29 percent) and services (64 percent). Those numbers are comparable numbers to the distribution of jobs in Oregon. At one time, Ireland had thriving natural resource industries in wood products and fisheries, but those have been greatly reduced in significance.

Not so long ago, Ireland’s unemployment situation was dire. In 1996, the national unemployment rate was 12 percent. Instead of working together to solve the problem, Ireland’s leaders of Ireland’s various political parties spent their time blaming each other’s parties and the policy choices of the government in London for their problems. Meanwhile, the real culprits—a tax rate which discouraged investment, a poorly skilled workforce and undereducated population unprepared to compete in the new economy and an excessively generous social welfare system—continued to drag down the economy and discourage much needed foreign investment.

All that changed with the election of Mary Robinson as prime minister of the country in 1997. Much like Britain’s Margaret Thatcher, Mary Robinson was one of those rare people who grasped the national imagination and almost single-handedly changed the culture of a nation. With a series of economic and social reforms, Robinson and her government brought about astonishing progress in a very short time

Between 1997 and 2001, the Irish economy grew an average 9 percent per year. Ireland slashed its corporate tax rate 30 percent as a means of attracting new investment and began offering cash incentives to any corporation which would build a headquarters in Ireland. The government also increased its investment in higher education, and now boasts one of the most highly skilled and best educated workforces in Europe. Equally importantly, the country launched an aggressive tourism campaign supported by one of the best-funded and best-functioning government tourism agencies —a move which had the dual benefit of exposing Ireland’s potential to the world business community and providing economic opportunities for entrepreneurs and service providers in more rural parts of the nation, which were missing out on the economic boom which came first to the urban areas of the state.

The plan worked astonishingly well. Ireland quickly gained the nickname “the Celtic Tiger” of the European Union. Its gross domestic product, including exports, soared to $117 billion in 2003. Unemployment was slashed to an astonishing 3 percent nationwide—a level which requires the country to import labor to fill all the available jobs. Literacy rates jumped to 98 percent, and every corner of the nation prospered as tourists poured in creating jobs in the service, entertainment and hospitality industry. Although the country was not immune from the economic effects of a worldwide slowdown which began in 2001, its economy continues to prosper, with unemployment holding steady at 5 percent, inflation at 3.1 percent and, by my count, 55 cranes looming over major construction projects on the Dublin skyline.

The question I was left to ponder as we flew out of Dublin was: “If the Irish can overcome their political and historical difficulties, why can’t we?”

Ireland did several things that would benefit us in Oregon. First, the county’s leadership united behind a common goal of economic recovery. Its parliament gave its leader a charge, and then gave her the support to carry out her responsibilities—something Oregon’s legislature seems decidedly unwilling to do. Secondly, the country recognized that in new economy, old skills aren’t adequate. By placing a high value on education and skill development, the nation was able to turn its workforce from a problem which had to be solved into an asset new businesses were eager to capitalize on. Thirdly, the nation quit pining for a way of life that was yesterday and turned its attention to what could be achieved realistically tomorrow. Fourthly, the Irish faced squarely the undeniable fiscal reality that private businesses and entrepreneurs, not governments, ultimately create jobs. As a national policy, Ireland recognized that when companies prosper, so do workers and communities, and it eliminated long-standing barriers to those profits. Finally, Ireland stopped waiting for the world to find out what the Irish had to offer and instead, through astute tourism and marketing, brought the world to its doorstep.

It sounds simple. But as any Oregonian who has been around since the late 1980s knows, the delivery is the tough part. Ireland is a country which one writer described as “paralyzed under the weight of its own history.” In some ways, that’s an apt description of the current political climate in Oregon, where our citizens and leaders are caught between mourning a lost past and fighting amongst themselves over how best to confront the future. I take comfort that one small country with geography, a population and a problem not unlike our own found a solution. There may be hope for us yet.

Election '04: Where To From Here?

sBy Scott R. Cooper, Crook County Judge
published in the Central Oregonian, November 2004

Expect Paybacks And Rewards Now That The Electin's Over

The election of 2004 is over. The yard signs have started to disappear. A downtown window which just seven days ago was filled with political signs once again has a lonely “for rent” sign. Was it really only a week ago that the pollsters, pundits, ex-politicians and veteran observers of FOX and CNN and pundits seemed unanimously agreed that the aftermath of this election would bring doubt and chaos at a level seldom experienced in American history?

In fact, it didn’t. The President was re-elected with a majority of the electoral votes and the popular vote. John Kerry graciously conceded the morning after, and the President graciously accepted. By noon West Coast time, it was all over.

So now what? As we survey the political landscape in the aftermath of Nov. 3, 2004, what do the national election results mean for us in Crook County?

The President lost Oregon by just over 60,000 votes. Crook County delivered for George Bush, as did 28 of Oregon’s 36 counties, but the combined strength of rural Oregon’s vote wasn’t enough to offset the overwhelmingly pro-Kerry vote cast predominantly in Multnomah and Lane Counties. It remains now to be seen (to mix a metaphor) whether by backing the wrong horse, Oregon also cooked its goose!

An issue that looms large in the minds of counties across Oregon and across the West is the upcoming fight to reauthorize public law 106-393. That law, passed at the behest of Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden and Idaho Sen. Larry Craig distributes around $800 million annually to communities which, prior to the 1990s, received large amounts of revenue from timber severance taxes—revenue which primarily supported schools and roads. About half the revenue received through the legislation comes to Oregon. When Congress passed this legislation in 2000, the federal budget had a $236 billion surplus. Today, the situation looks much different, with the federal deficit bouncing around the $500 billion mark. It remains to be seen whether additional tax cuts favored by the President will provide sufficient stimulus to move the economy enough to put the federal budget back in the black. If they don’t, the fight to reauthorize spending that primarily benefits so called “blue states” may be doomed from the start. Failure to reauthorize the legislation would mean a potential loss of around $2.4 million annually for Crook County or about half of the county road budget, and it would result in a reduction of about $10 million to Oregon schools—at a time when the state budget outlook is already bleak.

Another issue on the minds of a newly energized conservative Congress is the possibility of pursuing a long-held dream of privatizing the Bonneville Power Administration. The fact that residents of the Northwest enjoy relatively inexpensive power, compared to (and many would argue at the expense of) the rest of the nation, already rankles. President Bush proposed privatizing BPA in his last budget submittal, and given the administration’s free-market approach to a national energy policy, there is every reason to believe he will continue to pursue this idea. That would be devastating to the Northwest economy, plagued as it is with continuing weak economic fundamentals. Low energy costs are one of the principle benefits every economic development professional in this state uses to sell Oregon. Take that away, and the state’s economy will likely take a further turndown, the effect of which would as always be magnified east of the Cascades.

Of course, no President has the ability on his own to do anything without a willing Congress, and the closely divided U.S. Congress may just be the salvation of the Northwest. One of the interesting outcomes of this election is that Oregon Sen. Gordon Smith remains the only West Coast Republican in the Senate. That leaves him in a powerful position to lobby the White House to both pursue certain policy objectives or to leave well enough alone. How the senator will choose to use what are, after all, a limited number of political chits, remains to be seen, but he is certainly in a position to get the White House on the phone when necessary. That’s not bad for Crook County. Senators, like presidents, have long memories, and Sen. Smith is unlikely to have forgotten that just two years ago this county returned him to Washington with a 73 percent margin.

Another figure not to be discounted in the upcoming Congress is Rep. Greg Walden. The only Republican congressman in Oregon, the representative has been quietly advancing through the ranks. Now an assistant “whip,” or party leader, he will return to the 109th Congress with even more seniority and more experience. Already, he is the deputy majority whip, which gives him access to congressional leadership and a strong voice in influencing what legislation gets heard (and what doesn’t.) He holds a coveted seat on the House Energy Committee, which would have say over any BPA-privatization proposal and he chairs the House Forest Resources Subcommittee, which likely will eventually consider the reauthorization of the county payments legislation. Highly popular in his district and not vulnerable to challenge, he isn’t going anywhere, and he has perfectly positioned himself to represent the issues of this district on the national stage. Look for more good things from his direction in the coming two years.

Overall, the election was a mixed bag for Oregon. Voters were just as divided in our state as they were throughout the country. We will no doubt pay for some of our decisions, just as we are hoping for rich rewards as a result of others. The only certainty we have going forward is that there will be another election for the House in two years, and the debate about presidential prospects for 2008 has already begun. The close margin between the presidential candidates this time, the small majorities enjoyed by the two political parties, and the fact that Oregon’s issues are likely to receive attention in the next four years will keep Oregon in play on the national stage. With that kind of attention comes risk, but there is also opportunity. Whether and how we use it, is the challenge for the rest of us.