According to the Citizens Research Council of Michigan, at least 58
separate types of "economic development" entities or programs are currently operating in Michigan.[*] The
scope of this activity is broad and includes grants; discriminatory tax
breaks; direct and indirect subsidies; subsidized loans and loan guarantees;
financing authorities; "enterprise zones" and "incubators"; job training
programs; and more. Probably a majority of Michigan's 1,859 local governments
participate to some degree, plus most or all state universities and community
In addition, there are literally hundreds of economic development
boards, local and state authorities, councils and more (the CRC identified 277
such "special purpose units"
back in 1998, and the number is certainly higher today). Their powers vary and
may include taxing (or "capturing" taxes), borrowing, lending, spending or
some combination of these. In every case, they include the power to grant
special favors to a particular company, developer, industry or area.
Economic history, scholarly research and independent
analyses of particular programs all point to the same conclusion: At best, such
programs do nothing to grow the economy of a city, state, region or country,
and in many if not most cases, they are actually counterproductive. In numerous posts,
articles and studies Michael LaFaive has explained the reasons for this and documented the
failure of specific programs like the Michigan Economic Growth Authority,
which is considered this state's "flagship" economic development program.
If these programs don't work, why do lawmakers keep expanding them? I
think there are three reasons.
First, there's a "seen and unseen" problem: It's easy to see
a particular firm offering to invest and create jobs in one community
if the government will only grant it some special favor not available to
other firms. Harder to see are the negative effects of such activity on the rest of the
economy, including the additional tax burdens carried by the non-favored firms.
Second, while all this activity does nothing for real economic development, it's a
highly effective tool for political development.
Doing the things necessary to foster real
economic growth — cutting government spending, lowering taxes, reducing
regulations and modernizing labor laws — are hard because they all make
politically powerful special interests angry. Expanding economic development
programs lets lawmakers pretend to be "doing something" to help the economy,
regardless of whether they really are. Plus, every favor handed out to a
particular interest in return for an investment generates opportunities for
glowing press releases and ribbon-cutting ceremonies.
Finally, perhaps the most important reason is suggested by
the multiplicity of state and local entities empowered to grant favors: political careerism. The primary goal of members of our current political
class, including almost every one of Michigan's 148 legislators, is to remain
on a government payroll for the rest of their working lives, and hopefully
retire with a generous government pension and benefits. Prior to becoming a
senator or representative, the vast majority of current legislators had been
elected or appointed to some local government position, including in economic
When these members of the political class face a choice between
serving the people or serving "the system," they'll almost always choose the
latter, because that's how to attain their real goal: avoiding private sector
employment with all its "hard" accountability for actual performance.
Expanding the economic development empire in this state
represents opportunity to term-limited lawmakers. All the special favors
may do nothing to expand jobs for the people, but the growing number of
entities with the power to grant them creates hundreds of potential job
opportunities for the political careerists who populate Michigan's term-limited
[*]The actual figure may be larger, because these programs
have been rapidly proliferating in recent years, and new ones are being
proposed every week: A MichiganVotes keyword search for the term "tax breaks"
discovers 95 bills entered so far this year, and 126 with the word "subsidy;" most but
not all of these propose new economic development programs or expansions of
Permission to reprint this blog post in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided that the author (or authors) and the Mackinac Center for Public Policy are properly cited.
Permission to reprint any comments below is granted only for those comments written by Mackinac Center policy staff.