Center for American Progress Action

FIVE Facts About Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts Economy

FIVE Facts About Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts Economy

Authors

  • Advocacy Team

A Severely Weak Economy Under Mitt Romney

Mitt Romney’s main justification for running for president is his experience Bain Capital and supposed ability to turn the economy around. As it turns out, that was also his main justification when he was running for governor of Massachusetts in 2002.

How’d that work out for Massachusetts? Not very well.

ThinkProgress’ Travis Waldron rounds up five damning facts about Romney’s stewardship of the Massachusetts economy:

1. Ranked 47th in job growth: Despite Romney’s professed expertise in creating jobs, Massachusetts ranked 47th in job growth during his time as governor. The state’s total job growth was just 0.9 percent, well behind other high-wage, high-skill economies in New York (2.7), California (4.7), and North Carolina (7.6). The national average, meanwhile, was better than 5 percent.

2. Suffered the second-largest labor force decline in the nation: Only Louisiana, which was ravaged by Hurricane Katrina in 2005, saw a bigger decline in its labor force than Massachusetts during Romney’s tenure as governor. The US Census Bureau estimated that between July 2002 and July 2006, 222,000 more residents left Massachusetts for other states than came to it. That decline largely explains the state’s decreasing unemployment rate (from 5.6 to 4.7 percent) while Romney was in office, according to Northeastern University economics professor Andrew Sum. At the same time, the nation as a wholeadded 8 million people to the labor force.

3. Lost 14 percent of its manufacturing jobs: Massachusetts lost 14 percent of its manufacturing jobs during Romney’s time in office, according to Sum. The loss was double the rate that the nation as a whole lost manufacturing jobs. In 2004, Romney vetoed legislation that would have banned companies doing business with the state from outsourcing jobs to other countries.

4. Experienced “below average” economic growth and was “often near the bottom”: “There was not one measure where the state did well under his term in office. We were below average and often near the bottom,” Sum told the Washington Post in February. As a result, the state was more comparable to Rust Belt states like Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio than it was to other high-tech economies it typically competes with.

5. Piled on more debt than any other state: Romney left Massachusetts residents with $10,504 in per capita bond debt, the highest of any state in the nation when he left office in 2007. The state ranked second in debt as a percentage of personal income. Romney regularly omits those statistics from his Massachusetts record, instead touting the fact that he balanced the state’s budget (he was constitutionally required to do so). He wouldn’t be much different as president: his proposed tax plan adds more than $10 trillion to the national debt.

Astoundingly, the Romney campaign’s response to these facts is that Romney deserves some slack because the economy was really bad when he came into office. Here’s Romney’s senior adviser Ed Gillespie on Fox yesterday:

“This is what they’re doing, Chris,” Gillespie said. “You take the first year, which is a low base year when the governor came in and took office, because it was 50th in job creation out of all of the states, dead last … and they’re averaging out over the four years. So, they are bringing down the gains of his fourth year in office, which shows the real impact of his policies and diluting it with the first year in office.”

The Washington Post’s Greg Sargent explains how ridiculously hypocritical this is:

Got it? The Romney campaign now claims that factoring in the “first year” of job losses under Romney constitutes “diluting” his record, and that the later part of his term is what we should look at to gauge the “real impact of his policies.” And yet, the Romney camp is claiming that the “real impact” of Obama’s policies should be judged by a metric thatdoes factor in the massive job losses that took place at the start of Obama’s term. The Romney camp echoed this last week in a press release.

If Gillespie were to exempt Obama’s first year in office — as he seems to want us to do for Romney — then Obama has created millions and millions of jobs.

As we discussed on Friday, President Obama has now created more than 4.3 MILLION private sector jobs and could have created more than a million more jobs if not for Republican efforts to sabotage the economy recovery.

Evening Brief: Important Stories That You May Have Missed

Will Republicans in Congress break their no-tax pledge to protect military spending?

Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) worked to weaken the Wall Street reform law he brags about having helped pass, even after it was signed into law.

Alyssa on sexism in the trailer for Hitman: Absolution.

Study: Romney and his allies are running an overwhelmingly negative TV campaign while Obama is largely staying positive.

The Department of Defense had two better-than-Hubble telescopes just sitting around, so it decided to give them to NASA.

Florida isn’t the only state purging eligible voters from the rolls — Texas also has a voter purge policy potentially affecting 300,000 voters.

According to an ex-CIA officer, there are now more spies on American soil than there were during the Cold War.

Conservatives are very upset that Romney’s transition chief supports a key part of Obamacare — and is making money by helping states implement it.

Verizon is laying off 1,700 workers after paying its CEO $22 MILLION last year.

 

The positions of American Progress, and our policy experts, are independent, and the findings and conclusions presented are those of American Progress alone. A full list of supporters is available here. American Progress would like to acknowledge the many generous supporters who make our work possible.

Authors

Advocacy Team