I spent this morning, and the first part of this afternoon, at the Washington Policy Center's annual Environmental Policy Luncheon and Conference. I'll have more to say about the presentations over the next few weeks. For today, I just want to pass on this point, made by John Charles, president of the Cascade Policy Institute in Oregon: States with bad policies tend to lose people to states with better policies.
The example he used will amuse many Washingtonians. According to Charles, Oregon has uniquely bad land use regulations, and, as a result, the state is losing people to Washington and Idaho. (Those not familiar with Washington state may need to know that this state has its own draconian land use regulations. But, apparently, it could be worse.)
Cross posted at Jim Miller on Politics.
Posted by Jim Miller at July 15, 2008 03:46 PM | Email ThisOregon is a great place to be a broke liberal student, but a horrid place to be a working homeowner.
Posted by: Andy on July 15, 2008 04:43 PMbloated mess
And presenting the worst possible alternative as the only alternative to bad policy is a strawman argument. One down there with, "our policy would be a success if only we raised taxes and spent a lot more on it" when it comes to intellectual honesty.
Efforts to "reform" Oregon's land use regulations has been an unmitigated disaster, and were only even possible with a massive bait-and-switch by conservative groups.
And while you may poo-poo regulations, the reverse isn't quite true, either. Assuming that a complete lack of regulations would cure all the issues is a remarkable leap of faith. Regulations are both a boon and a curse, and there need to be the proper balance.
Posted by: demo kid on July 15, 2008 09:34 PMOregon isn't shrinking...they're continuing to increase their population and apparently were 11th in the nation last year in growth.
Has the state's net migration become negative this year? It hasn't been up through 2007.
Posted by: BA on July 16, 2008 07:17 AMThere is a reason that 60,000 people in Clark County would rather go through the hassle and commute of living on this side of the river and working over there, particularly when you throw in the fact that those who work there and live here still have to pay Oregon income tax.
Portland's schools are a colossal failure, even though they're controlled by fringe-left whack jobs not unlike those posting on a subject here out of complete ignorance.
So, here's today's suggestion... quite like the one I provide to those so in love with loot rail:
If you think the Soviet Socialist Republic of Oregon is all that... then feel free to move down there.
That way, you can TRULY experience the closest thing to Stalinist Moscow available as an American state today.
Posted by: hinton on July 16, 2008 08:43 AMConsistent hysterics from the moonbat right. Funny that the big reason why schools in Oregon are lousy is because they weren't being paid enough, and many were poached by other states...
Posted by: demo kid on July 16, 2008 09:18 AMWhile the land laws are draconian- if you've got enough limosine liberal money you can park your butt on top of skyline in a gajillion dollar house with a view.
Forget about going from Vancouver to Hillsboro during rush hour.
I am so thankful to have that place in the rear view mirror.