Governor Rick Perry is drawing a lot of attention since his announcement on Saturday that he is running for president. One positive aspect about Perry:
Texas has no income tax, ranks 46th overall for the taxes it collects per capita and has the strongest job growth in the country. The state has accounted for between 30 percent and half of the net new jobs in the country in the past two years, depending on who is counting.
On the other hand:
While Obama seeks to increase federal funding for education, Texas ranks 47th in the country for the level of state spending on schools. And while the Obama administration clamps down on pollution, Texas ranks highest in the country for the levels of toxic chemicals released into the water and carcinogens released into the air, according to Scorecard, an organization that tracks nationwide pollution data.
Despite its strong economy, Texas ranks low on many social markers. It has the fourth- highest poverty rate, the seventh-highest teenage birth rate, and the lowest rate of people over 25 with a high school degree. Experts attribute these markers to the state’s high proportion of immigrants, to political decisions on taxes and spending, and to the state’s business climate. The state spends second to least on Medicaid, per capita, of any state in the country, and the least of any state on mental health care. The rate of unionization is low, which is one reason why the state ranks second to last in the percentage of the population covered by employer health insurance.
Here’s the point, the GOP now has a governor who leads a utopia that they proclaim to want. However, with low social indicators, it is a liberal’s paradise to attack. This points to a great contrast between Barack Obama and Rick Perry. Stability versus growth, one will win in 2012 and one will lose.
Which factor is more important to you, economic growth or social stability?