Being A Competitive State

In my column in today's Everett Herald I expanded on a couple of themes from last week's blog posts: the AG's opinion that the worker privacy act is preempted by federal law and the WSLC's interest in competitiveness rankings.

Increasingly, I believe the "best states" ratings gimmicks used by think tanks and magazines mislead more than they inform. As I wrote in this Washington Business column, there's no way to identify a single best business climate for all businesses. But folks keep trying, with greater or lesser degrees of success.

Typically, the more specific the analysis, the better. Industry-focused research, like the BSU manufacturing study, will generally be better at capturing relevant information than a general business climate assessment. Academic research is more credible than most media analyses because of the value universities place on transparency and peer review. While data and statistics matter, so do the perceptions of site selection and economic development consultants.

Finally, because conditions vary dramatically within a state, metro-area reports are often more useful than statewide reports. State policies matter most when we consider how they influence business costs and labor markets. 

Today, however, I suggest that one way we can improve the business climate for all businesses would be to take the pernicious, unconstitutional and unnecessary Worker Privacy Act off the table. (Kris Tefft's post at Olympia Business Watch explains the history of the legislation further.)

And here's a link to the Gary Becker blog post I cite in the column. It's a good read.