Archives: Reg Murphy Pubs

Is the United States a Gerontocracy?

Written by Roscoe Scarborough on . Posted in Reg Murphy, Roscoe Scarborough.

At 81, Joe Biden is the first octogenarian to occupy the Oval Office. After a poor debate performance and pressure to bow out from Democrats, Biden will not seek reelection. At 78, Trump is the oldest nominee for the US Presidency in history. Trump would be the oldest US president to start a new term if elected in November. Kamala Harris, the presumptive Democratic Party nominee, would be 60 on Inauguration Day. The Presidency is one of the few jobs in the world where 60 is considered youthful.

Extreme age is not limited to the executive branch. Mitch McConnell is 82. Nancy Pelosi is 84. Chuck Grassley is 90. At least 20 members of Congress are over 80. The average ages in the US House and Senate are 58 and 64, respectively. Only 6% of Congress is under 40. Meanwhile, the median age in the US is 39. In terms of age, Congress does not represent the electorate.

Is the United States a gerontocracy? A gerontocracy is a society governed by old people. In many political structures, the oldest individuals hold the most power because wealth, experience, and social capital accumulate with age. Whether upheld by formal laws or informal conventions, a gerontocracy is a form of rule in which leaders are significantly older than most of the population. There is much evidence that our government is run by and serves the interests of older Americans.

There are no maximum age limits for elected office, but there are minimum ages to serve. One must be 25 to serve in the House, 30 to serve in the Senate, and 35 to serve as President. The Constitution prohibits youth from holding federal office.

Our election system benefits retirees and disenfranchises working adults. Election Day is not a federal holiday. Work prohibits many eligible voters from participating in democracy. Employment is no longer a barrier to voting for retirees. It’s not surprising that Americans 65 and older vote at a higher rate than any other age group.

One in 5 American citizens are ineligible to vote in elections due to age-based discrimination. Youth are excluded categorically from formal participation in our nation’s political process, much like felons and noncitizens. At the other end of the age spectrum, there is no age limit on voting. Thus, politicians cater to the legislative priorities of seniors and disregard the interests of the youth who are ineligible to vote.

Are our tax dollars spent on the young or the old? The federal budget prioritizes the needs of seniors over youth. In fiscal year 2023, 21% of the federal budget was spent on Social Security and 14% was spent on Medicare. 35% of the entire federal budget was spent on retirees. By comparison, only 3% of the federal budget was spent on education. Altogether, less than 10% of the 2023 federal budget was spent on children.

Young and old people face age-based discrimination at work and in other social institutions. However, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 protects applicants and employees 40 years of age and older from discrimination on the basis of age. Workers under 40 are not protected from age discrimination through federal law, although state and local laws protect some younger workers.

This is not to say that seniors in the US do not face hardships. Older people confront ageism at work. Seniors often experience social isolation and invisibility in retirement. Elder abuse and neglect are underreported and seldom prosecuted. Culturally, it has fallen out of favor to respect one’s elders. Older Americans face many challenges.

The age of our political leaders, laws restricting who can serve in government, political disenfranchisement of working-age adults and youth, disproportionate federal spending to support seniors, and legal protections for older workers are all evidence that we live in a gerontocracy. As always, my goal is to encourage critical thinking and offer a fresh perspective. Evaluate the evidence and draw your own conclusions.

Roscoe Scarborough, Ph.D. is chair of the Department of Social Sciences and associate professor of sociology at College of Coastal Georgia. He is an associate scholar at the Reg Murphy Center for Economic and Policy Studies. He can be reached by email at rscarborough@ccga.edu.

Revitalizing Georgia’s Small Towns

Written by Drew Cagle on . Posted in Reg Murphy.

Georgia’s small towns, with their rich history and unique charm, have always been a cornerstone of the state’s identity. Yet, in recent years, many of these communities have faced economic challenges, population decline, and the threat of fading into obscurity. However, a wave of revitalization efforts is breathing new life into these towns, promising a bright future for places like the Golden Isles and beyond.

The Golden Isles are a prime example of small town revitalization. Aside from beachy landscapes and Island life, these communities have seen a resurgence in recent years thanks to a combination of community-driven initiatives, strategic investments, and a focus on sustainable tourism.

Brunswick, in particular, has undergone significant transformation. Once plagued by economic stagnation, the historic downtown area is now bustling with new businesses, restaurants, cultural venues, community activities, and more. This revival has been largely attributed to the efforts of local organizations, community members, business owners, and the city government, which have worked tirelessly to preserve the town’s historic architecture while promoting modern development, helping to make the downtown Brunswick area a desirable location.

The success of the Golden Isles’ revitalization efforts can be largely credited to the collaborative spirit among residents, local businesses, and government entities. Initiatives like the Brunswick Downtown Development Authority and the Golden Isles Convention and Visitors Bureau have played pivotal roles in coordinating efforts to attract tourists and new residents alike.

Moreover, local entrepreneurs have embraced the challenge, opening unique shops, cafes, and galleries that highlight the area’s distinctive character. These small businesses not only cater to tourists but also provide essential services and employment opportunities for residents, further bolstering the local economy.

Sustainable tourism has been a key component of the Golden Isles’ revitalization strategy. Recognizing the delicate balance between economic growth and environmental preservation, local leaders have implemented measures to ensure that tourism development does not come at the expense of the region’s natural beauty.

Efforts to promote eco-friendly practices among businesses and tourists have been successful, with initiatives ranging from beach clean-up programs to the promotion of local wildlife conservation projects, to community involvement with the Sea Turtle Center on Jekyll Island. These measures not only help to preserve the Golden Isles ecosystem for future generations, but also help generate tourism and economic activity.

The revitalization of the Golden Isles offers valuable lessons for other small towns in Georgia. One of the most critical takeaways is the importance of leveraging local assets. By highlighting unique cultural, historical, and natural features, towns can attract visitors and new residents who appreciate the distinctive character of these communities. For example, the Golden Isles have made use of resources such as the historic Butler plantation and Forts Frederica and King George.

Another lesson is the power of community involvement. Revitalization efforts are most successful when they are driven by the people who live and work in these towns. Engaging residents in the planning and implementation of development projects ensures that the changes reflect the community’s values and needs.

Finally, strategic partnerships between public and private sectors are essential. By working together, local governments, businesses, and community organizations can pool resources and expertise to create a cohesive and effective revitalization plan.

In conclusion, the revitalization of Georgia’s small towns is a testament to the resilience and creativity of their residents. With continued effort and investment, the Golden Isles and many other communities across the state are poised for a resurgence, ensuring that their localities remain vibrant.

Drew S. Cagle, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor of Political Science in the Department of Social Sciences at College of Coastal Georgia. He is an associate scholar at the Reg Murphy Center for Economic and Policy Studies. He can be reached by email at dcagle@ccga.edu.

The End of the Chevron Doctrine

Written by Heather Farley on . Posted in Heather Farley, Reg Murphy.

On June 28th, the Supreme Court ended a 40-year old legal precedent that fundamentally impacts the way our federal government operates. In the decision of Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the Supreme Court ruled on a doctrine called “Chevron deference” which allows the interpretation of laws that are ambiguous to rely on agency expertise. In other words, when laws are passed that don’t lay out specifics on how to implement the law, the responsible government agency (eg. The EPA, NASA, Postal Service, etc) is permitted to use its expertise to interpret how to regulate within the law.

The courts have historically had a two-pronged approach to this. They first determine if Congress has spoken directly to the issue or if there is ambiguity. Then, they determine if the agency interpretation is reasonable. Even if the court might prefer a different interpretation, if the agency’s interpretation is reasonable, the agency’s view is upheld. agency’s view is upheld. The court saw this as more efficient, consistent, and as a way of deferring to agency expertise. Now, that efficiency, consistency, and deference is turned on its head.

This might sound a little dry, but it’s a very big deal. Representative Buddy Carter referred to it as “the beginning of the end of the administrative state” in his weekly newsletter last week. He, like many conservatives and libertarians, feels that the federal bureaucracy has become too large and imbued with too much power.

In school, we are taught about the separation of powers within the federal government. The basic explanation is that the legislative branch writes laws, the executive branch implements them, and the judicial branch interprets them through the resolution of arguments. This explanation, however, leaves out the so-called “fourth branch of government” and its role in implementation and interpretation.

Generally, the federal bureaucracy has grown in number of employees over time, with notable spikes in periods when there is an expansion of government programs like the New Deal, in times of war, and in times of economic decline. These growth periods are not met with periods of decrease in the bureaucracy, however, as programs and agencies can be difficult to dismantle. The result is that critics point to a government that has its fingers in too many areas. It turns out a lot of Americans agree.

A 2023 Gallup poll indicated that 54% of Americans believe the government is “trying to do too many things that should be left to individuals and businesses” and 44% think there is “too much government regulation of business and industry.” These numbers fall largely along party lines.

Despite these numbers, when taken individually, many Americans have a very favorable view of specific agencies such as the National Park Service, USPS, NASA, the Social Security Administration, the CDC, and the EPA. That may seem surprising, but all these agencies pulled greater that 55% favorable ratings in 2023.  

One of the effects of ending Chevron deference is that these agencies – whether we like them or not – will no longer be able to apply their expertise to interpreting the laws they must implement. For example, let’s say that Congress passes a law related to space commercialization, but the statute has ambiguous language regarding safety standards on private space missions. Previously, NASA would interpret this ambiguity, establish safety standards, and if those standards were challenged, the court would determine if they were reasonable. Now, the courts will be able to independently interpret statutory language which could lead to a completely different sets of standards than those NASA would have set. Further, different courts could interpret the statute in different ways causing inconsistency in regulatory outcomes.

Solutions could be developed in Congress by clarifying statutory language (though that could make it very difficult to pass laws), explicitly delegating authority to specific agencies, or even through the establishment of independent review bodies that could work with agencies to develop sound interpretations. Each of these solutions could help mitigate against the challenges this decision poses.

The question of whether the size and power of the bureaucracy is too large is valid and deserves critique. Regardless, reversing Chevron deference is going to have fundamental impacts on every agency of the bureaucracy with the potential to cause compliance challenges and fragmented regulatory outcomes. Congress, it’s your ball.

Dr. Heather Farley is Chair of the Department of Business and Public Administration and Associate Professor of Public Management at the College of Coastal Georgia. She is an associate of the College’s Reg Murphy Center for Economic and Policy Studies and an environmental policy scholar. The opinions found in this article do not necessarily represent those of the College of Coastal Georgia.

An economist’s take on Medicaid expansion

Written by Melissa Trussell on . Posted in Melissa Trussell, Reg Murphy.

In the last several weeks, my colleagues have offered their takes on Medicaid expansion in Georgia. Dr. Drew Cagle wrote that Medicaid expansion, while controversial, is a “critical step” in maintaining quality healthcare in rural Georgia. Then, Dr. Roscoe Scarborough, in his recent piece on U.S. drug overdose deaths, called out Medicaid expansion as part of the solution to our ongoing addiction and overdose problems.

I am not typically the bandwagoning type, but this is a policy topic worth a look through an economist’s lens. Medicaid expansion makes good economic sense.

Studies show that many states report improvements to their budgetary bottom lines when they expand Medicaid. This is because Medicaid expansion opens the door for more federal funding to flow into states, and it also increases tax revenue streams from healthcare providers.

But we know the true economic impact of any policy is not as simple as its explicit budget implications. True economic impact lies in a product or outcome. For Medicaid expansion, the product is healthy people. And the positive impact on an economy of healthy people cannot be overstated.

According to the CDC, U.S. employers lose an average of $1685 per employee per year due to absenteeism, disability, or reduced output caused by health problems. This is a total of over $225 billion lost per year in the U.S.

Many of these health problems — e.g. heart disease, asthma, mental health disorders, diabetes, cancer – are more prevalent among poorer Americans and are treatable or avoidable altogether with access to quality, affordable healthcare.

Health disparities, defined as health differences attributable to social, economic, and/or environmental disadvantages, lead to around $42 billion in productivity losses per year.

Moreover, an April 2024 study in the journal Health Policy found that in many cases, illness even causes poverty, sometimes with generational effects, exacerbating the problem for individuals, families, and society. The conclusion of this study was that social insurance (e.g. Medicaid) significantly weakens the effect of poor health on poverty.

Adding insult to injury, a failure to expand healthcare coverage to low income Georgians may also end up denying healthcare options to many middle or upper class Georgians in rural areas. As Dr. Cagle’s From the Murphy Center article a few weeks ago pointed out, rural hospitals are shutting down, in part due to their inability to cover services to uninsured patients.

And, an economic analysis only strengthens Dr. Scarborough’s point that Medicaid expansion can help mitigate effects of America’s current opioid / drug overdose crisis. Supply-side policy solutions, like decreasing international drug smuggling, get a lot of press, but decreasing supply increases prices, making drug sales more lucrative, and makes only a small dent in the problem of illegal drug use. This is because the market for any addictive substance is characterized by highly inelastic demand, which means that buyers in this market are willing to pay whatever it takes to satisfy their addiction. When prices rise, we do not see a sharp change in market activity. The only truly effective policies against drug addiction are policies that are leveled at demand for the drugs—recovery programs, healthcare education, and mental and physical healthcare coverage. Medicaid expansion is low-hanging fruit in this fight.

Only ten states have not yet adopted Medicaid expansion. Georgia is among them. It may make political sense to keep holding out, but it does not make economic sense.

———–

Dr. Melissa Trussell is a professor in the School of Business and Public Management at College of Coastal Georgia who works with the college’s Reg Murphy Center for Economic and Policy Studies. Contact her at mtrussell@ccga.edu. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the College of Coastal Georgia.

A Tale of Two Ironies and a Solitary Socialist

Written by Don Mathews on . Posted in Don Mathews, Reg Murphy.

Properly told, the stories of two great ironies – one in the history of socialist ideas, the other in the history of capitalism – begin with French socialist, Louis Blanc (1811-1882). Let’s start with the socialist ideas irony.

One might surmise that the history of socialist ideas is loaded with ideas about socialism. It isn’t. It’s loaded with ideas about capitalism. 

From all the books, tracts, leaflets, pamphlets, primers, circulars, essays and articles that socialist thinkers have written over roughly 225 years, the pages devoted to critiquing capitalism could make a mountain range; the pages devoted to providing a blueprint of socialism, a mound.

Louis Blanc stands out among socialist writers for being the first to contribute a clump to the mound. Blanc certainly wrote more pages of capitalism critique than socialism blueprint. Nonetheless, he was the first socialist writer to offer specifics on how production in a socialist economy could be organized. Since Blanc, few socialist writers have mustered the wherewithal to venture beyond “in socialism, the means of production are owned by the people,” which barely qualifies as a doodle, never mind a blueprint. 

Blanc offered his blueprint in the last twelve pages of “The Organization of Work,” a 67-page pamphlet published in 1840. He used the first 55 pages to rage against a new kind of competition spawned from what Blanc called the “new economic regime,” which others would soon call capitalism. To Blanc, the new competition pitted worker against worker, capitalist against capitalist, and capitalist against worker in an economic civil war that spared few of poverty and no one of misery.

The solution, of course, was to replace competition with cooperation, but how to do that? Blanc’s answer: begin by introducing a new type of enterprise, the social workshop. Blanc’s social workshop amounts to a business enterprise in which workers, not capitalists, make all production and operational decisions – how the enterprise is organized, what to produce, who gets hired, who gets fired, who does what job and who gets paid what.

Blanc had no desire to vanquish capitalists. He encouraged capitalists to invest in social workshops, which would pay interest “guaranteed by the budget” on invested funds. But a capitalist would have no voice in decision-making unless the capitalist also worked in the workshop.

The social workshop’s advantage, Blanc argued, is this. In a private enterprise, the capitalist gives the orders, the workers obey. In a social workshop, the workers call the shots, so they naturally cooperate. And cooperating workers are more productive than order-obeying workers.

There is more to Blanc’s blueprint, namely the features that made it a blueprint of socialism. Blanc eventually lost faith in socialism, but not in social workshops, though none existed. He died in 1882, thinking his idea would go forever unrealized.

Yet as Blanc’s pamphlet made its rounds in 1840, American capitalism was beginning a remarkable evolution that produced enterprises run by workers. The advent of railroad and telegraph lines in the 1840s gave rise to new and larger businesses and a new kind of worker, the salaried manager. The late-1870s brought mass production, vertical integration and a much-expanded role for managers. By 1910, salaried managers, not capitalists, were making all production and operational decisions at many of America’s largest and most innovative business enterprises, including Standard Oil, General Electric and DuPont.

Thus, Louis Blanc’s dream of an enterprise run by workers was realized in capitalist America in its largest corporations. No doubt, a giant corporation is not the social workshop Blanc had in mind. Yet the fact is, capitalism’s behemoths are worker-run enterprises. Few ironies are more fun.

U.S. Overdose Deaths on the Decline

Written by Roscoe Scarborough on . Posted in Reg Murphy, Roscoe Scarborough.

The number of fatal overdose deaths in the United States peaked in May 2023 and started to decline in the latter half of the year, according to the most recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

An estimated 107,500 people died from fatal overdoses in the US in 2023, down from an estimated 111,000 overdose deaths in 2022. That is a 3.1% decline in overdose deaths in one year. This is the first decline in overdose deaths since 2018. The decline is modest and the data are preliminary. One might argue overdose deaths are plateauing, but it’s better news than another annual increase. Unfortunately, the US still has more fatal drug overdose deaths per capita than any other high-income nation.

Drug overdose declines are not equally distributed across our nation. All states east of the Mississippi saw a decline, except for Alabama, West Virginia, and Washington DC. Preliminary data show that Georgia saw a 5.58% decline in overdose deaths over the past year. Most states west of the Mississippi saw increases. Alaska, Oregon, Nevada, and Washington experienced over 25% increases in annual overdose deaths.

Two years ago, I wrote a column in this space about skyrocketing overdose deaths amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Many pandemic-era causes of overdose deaths have subsided. Social distancing and social isolation came to an end. Stress associated with living through a global pandemic has waned. Public health has moved beyond a myopic focus on COVID-19. All of these conditions should improve care for those struggling with addiction and reduce overdose deaths.

The US overdose crisis was once driven by prescription painkillers, then it was heroin, and in recent years fentanyl (a synthetic opioid) has been a primary cause of overdose deaths in the US. Fentanyl can be injected, but it’s often smoked, consumed in pills, or mixed in with other illicit drugs.

With deadly fentanyl now widespread, what’s causing overdose deaths to decline nationally? Shifts in the supply of available illicit drugs impact overdose deaths. Much of the 2023 increase in overdose deaths in western states coincides with the availability of fentanyl in the regional illicit drug supply. It’s possible that overdose deaths are declining overall because the overdose epidemic has already claimed such a significant percentage of the illicit drug using population in eastern states. On a more hopeful note, the US could be reaping the benefits of overdose prevention efforts and addiction treatments.

I suggested some reforms to address overdose deaths in my 2022 column. At least one suggested reform has been implemented—increasing access to naloxone/Narcan. In March 2023, the FDA approved over-the-counter naloxone nasal spray. My other policy recommendations have not been implemented in a meaningful way, at least not in Georgia.

Opioid manufacturers and distributors are paying billions in restitution for their roles in the opioid epidemic. These funds should be invested in evidence-based programs and practices.

Effective drug education and other prevention programs are critical to reducing overdose deaths. Prevention programs are more likely to succeed if paired with consistent messaging from family, public health departments, community organizations, and religious institutions.

Drug interdiction efforts must be improved. It is essential to slow the illegal smuggling of fentanyl into our nation. Similarly, state and local police must disrupt drug distribution in our communities.

Access to quality healthcare combats addiction and prevents overdose deaths. It is essential to expand access to a range of addiction treatment programs, including inpatient rehab, outpatient rehab, and medication-assisted treatment. These programs remain out of reach for many folks living with addiction due to cost, limited providers in one’s area, or a lack of insurance coverage.

Georgia is one of ten states that have not accepted expanded Medicaid coverage, which would provide healthcare for all adults earning up to 138% of the federal poverty line. Expanding Medicaid coverage provides one avenue for improving access to addiction treatment programs and reducing overdose deaths.

Roscoe Scarborough, Ph.D. is chair of the Department of Social Sciences and associate professor of sociology at College of Coastal Georgia. He is an associate scholar at the Reg Murphy Center for Economic and Policy Studies. He can be reached by email at rscarborough@ccga.edu.

The Rural Healthcare Crisis

Written by Drew Cagle on . Posted in Reg Murphy.

Nationwide, 104 rural hospitals have closed since 2005, and more than half of those remaining operate in a financial deficit. According to a 2024 report by the Atlanta Journal Constitution, because of these closures, as well as the rising cost of medical care and insurance, people living in rural America now have a 43% higher chance of dying from otherwise common illnesses. This effect is especially pronounced among women, due to the lack of proper pregnancy-related care.

According to the Georgia Hospital Association, since 2013, 12 rural hospitals have closed in Georgia, leaving a void in critical services and forcing residents to travel longer distances to visit an ER, receive a primary care check-up, or access a specialist. The same report found that 18 of Georgia’s 30 remaining rural hospitals were in danger of closure.

One of the most debated solutions to improve healthcare access in rural areas is Medicaid expansion. Proponents argue that expanding Medicaid would provide insurance coverage to a larger portion of the population, thereby increasing access to necessary medical services and reducing unpaid medical debt, which weighs down cash poor rural hospitals.

According to the Georgia Budget and Policy Institute, expanding Medicaid could insure over 400,000 Georgians, many of whom reside in rural areas. Currently, Georgia is one of 10 states left that have not expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, a decision that has left many low-income individuals without coverage.

However, political opposition to Medicaid expansion remains strong in Georgia. Critics are concerned about the long-term financial stability of Medicaid and the potential for entitlement abuse. Despite these concerns, data from states that have expanded Medicaid show significant benefits, including reduced mortality rates and improved health outcomes for low-income populations.

As rural hospitals close and healthcare providers become scarcer, telemedicine has emerged as a potential solution to bridge the gap in healthcare access. Telemedicine allows patients to consult with doctors remotely, reducing the need for long-distance travel. In South Georgia, several initiatives have been launched to promote telemedicine.

For instance, the Georgia Partnership for TeleHealth has expanded its services, providing more than 200,000 telehealth encounters annually. Also, during and after COVID, the state allowed telemedicine providers to act much as an in-person doctor’s visit, such as allowing them to prescribe controlled medications.

In the face of these challenges, local communities in South Georgia are taking action. Community health centers, such as those operated by the Georgia Primary Care Association, provide essential services to underserved populations. These centers offer a sliding fee scale based on income, ensuring that financial barriers do not prevent individuals from receiving care.

Additionally, mobile health clinics bring medical services directly to remote areas, further enhancing access. Finally, the non-profit organization CareSource recently invested $5 million to keep rural hospitals open.

Addressing the healthcare crisis in rural South Georgia requires a multifaceted approach. Expanding Medicaid, investing in telemedicine infrastructure, and supporting local health initiatives are all critical steps toward ensuring that all residents have access to the care they need. Political leaders must prioritize these issues and work collaboratively to develop sustainable solutions for all Georgians.

As we move forward, it is essential to keep the well-being of our rural communities at the forefront of policy discussions. Access to healthcare is not just a political issue; it is a matter of life and death for many Georgians.

Drew S. Cagle, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor of Political Science in the Department of Social Sciences at College of Coastal Georgia. He is an associate scholar at the Reg Murphy Center for Economic and Policy Studies. He can be reached by email at dcagle@ccga.edu.

CONSERVATION PAYS OFF

Written by Heather Farley on . Posted in Heather Farley, Reg Murphy.

In my last From the Murphy Center column, I wrote about the dwindling number of Atlantic right whales and the need for increased conservation efforts. There’s more to explore on this policy issue.

Shortly after I wrote the article, I learned about a wildlife campaign from the non-profit organization One Hundred Miles, urging the Biden Administration to issue expanded protections for right whales. As a conservationist, I support these actions enthusiastically, but as a policy analyst I am also thinking about the ‘why’ in our policy actions.

The question of why we should protect a critically endangered species might feel like an obvious one. We can’t just let them die off, right?! What a sad and unfortunate future that would be. For many of us, avoiding extinction is simply the right thing to do. While avoiding the extinction of a large charismatic species might tug at our heartstrings, however, policymakers often need pragmatic reasons.

In all policy decisions – in the development of laws, regulations, and agency rules – we are challenged with balancing competing interests. Expanding the habitat zone where vessel speeds must be reduced and increasing the number of vessels included in the rule will reduce vessel strikes and protect more whales (including right, humpback, fin, and sei whales), but it can also impact the maritime transport industry. The National Marine Manufacturers Association (NMMA), for example, contends that an expanded rule could put more than 810,000 jobs and nearly $230 billion in economic contributions at risk.

Given such a huge potential impact, what is the case for protecting the whales beyond the moral case alone? How does extinction impact us? Put simply, everything is tied to everything else. The interconnectedness of ecosystems means that the loss of a species can fundamentally change the ecosystem services available to us. The health of the marine ecosystem has far-reaching economic effects, especially on the food chain. In the case of the Atlantic right whale, effects would be seen in phytoplankton populations. Whale excrement is a nutrient source for these tiny ocean plants, which are vital for producing oxygen (about 50% of our earth’s oxygen) and sequestering carbon dioxide. They are also primary producers in the marine food web and impact fisheries. A decline in whales would result in a decline in phytoplankton which in turn impact fishery production. Will all the phytoplankton die suddenly if the right whale goes extinct? No. But that ecosystem will become less stable, less healthy, and less productive.

Just this month a study published in the journal Science highlighted that conservation efforts are not only highly effective in reducing biodiversity loss but also provide excellent economic returns. The study, a meta-analysis of 186 different studies and 665 trials, evaluated the impact of conservation interventions globally over the past century. The analysis revealed that more than half of the world’s total GDP, approximately $44 trillion, is moderately or highly dependent on ecosystem services. Investment in the conservation of these services proves to be highly beneficial; for every dollar spent on conservation, there is an estimated return of $100 in ecosystem services. Conservation works and it has the potential to improve both environmental and economic conditions.

Protecting the Atlantic right whale and other endangered species makes sense both economically and environmentally. Ecosystem health is closely tied to the survival of species. The interconnectedness of our ecosystems means that the loss of a single species can have cascading effects on biodiversity and the services these ecosystems provide. The recent study in Science underscores the significant economic returns on investment in conservation. By prioritizing conservation, we are safeguarding our natural resources and ensuring a healthier, more productive future.

Dr. Heather Farley is Chair of the Department of Business and Public Administration and Associate Professor of Public Management at the College of Coastal Georgia. She is an associate of the College’s Reg Murphy Center for Economic and Policy Studies and an environmental policy scholar. The opinions found in this article do not represent those of the College of Coastal Georgia.

The economics of summer camp

Written by Melissa Trussell on . Posted in Melissa Trussell, Reg Murphy.

For students attending Glynn County schools, this Friday marks the beginning of summer break! As a child I always enjoyed school, but I also approached summer with relief and excitement. Two whole months of play, vacationing, relaxing, summer camps, etc.—two whole months of just living the dream.

Now, as the parent of a school-aged child, summer break still brings an air of excitement, but it is far less carefree than it seemed as a child.

I realize now what a privileged childhood I had, with a two-parent household, and a full-time working dad who made enough money to allow my mom to stay home with my sisters and me full-time. My son certainly enjoys many privileges that come with my reduced summer work schedule, but summer break for the child of a single, working mom looks a lot different than my summer breaks did. We look forward to the beach days, the pool days, and summer travel, but like many children of working parents, my child also will spend many summer days in some form of childcare, often rebranded as “summer camp.”

Summer camp is big business! One local website lists 34 different organizations offering summer camp opportunities this year in the Golden Isles. Summer camps vary widely in price and depend on the length of camp, whether camp is day-only or overnight, and the types of activities campers will participate in. The American Camp Association says camp fees vary from less than $100 to over $1500 per week. In my experience shopping for day camps in the Golden Isles, average day camps around here are around here are $150-$250 per week.

The American Camp Association is currently collecting data for a national study on the economic impact of summer camps. Their website, though, cites a 2021 study of 348 day and overnight camps (600,000+ campers) in Wisconsin. The study finds a $717 million economic impact on the state from summer camps. A similar study in the Northeastern U.S. in 2017 found a $3.2 billion impact of summer camps in that region. But, these two studies include only the operating expenditures and employment of the camps.

If you read my last article for this column, you already can identify some major shortcomings of this measure of economic impact. If summer camps did not exist, these employees would not necessarily be unemployed, and the money spent on camp would not necessarily go unspent. Thus, this measure may be useful in some contexts, but it does not truly represent what is gained in the state’s economy through the existence of summer camps.

The true impact of summer camp is in the service it provides. The American Camp Association article mentions, but does not include in the economic impact calculation, the benefits to children of the physical, educational, and social activities camp offers. Camps not only offer enriching activities that add to what students learn throughout the school year, but they also can help to mitigate the effects of summer learning loss and helping students bounce back into school the next year with greater ease.

But, perhaps the most significant economic impact of summer camp is in labor force participation of parents, specifically women. The Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research  published findings that women’s employment-to-population ratio drops significantly from May to July. They find this drop is greatest among mothers of younger children, and they track the trend across states with differing school schedules to show that the drop in employment coincides with school closure. Women’s earnings fall 3.3 percent over the summer. And that is with the existence of summer camps! The true economic impact of summer camp is in how much greater the drop in women’s employment and wages would necessarily be without summer childcare.

In my family alone, that impact is huge. While I can do a lot of my summer working from home or while traveling, writing is especially hard with distractions. When you see publications or articles like this one from me during the summer break, we all have summer camp to thank.

———–

Dr. Melissa Trussell is a professor in the School of Business and Public Management at College of Coastal Georgia who works with the college’s Reg Murphy Center for Economic and Policy Studies. Contact her at mtrussell@ccga.edu. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the College of Coastal Georgia.

Three Strong Economies: U.S., Georgia, and Glynn

Written by Don Mathews on . Posted in Don Mathews, Reg Murphy.

It warrants repeating: the performance of the U.S. economy over the past 4 years is remarkable.

Despite four years and counting of continuous adversity – the pandemic, followed by inflation, followed by the Federal Reserve’s tight monetary policy – the U.S. economy has posted decent or better real GDP growth in each of the last seven quarters and unemployment rates below 4% in each of the last 27 months.

More remarkable are the performances of the economies of Georgia and Glynn over the past four years. 

Both economies were strong heading into 2020. Georgia finished 2019 with a solid 3.3% increase in real gross state product. Its labor force grew by 82,622 to 5,208,593. Its labor market was tight: 96.5% of the 5,208,593 were employed.

County output data are of dubious reliability for my taste, but experience plus data related to output that are reliable indicate that the Glynn economy was thriving ahead of 2020. Most telling is the decrease in Glynn’s unemployment rate from 3.7% in 2018 to 3.5% in 2019. A tight local labor market that becomes even tighter is a symptom of a thriving local economy.

In March 2020, the pandemic hit. It hit Georgia hard. It hit Glynn harder.

In April, Georgia’s labor force sunk to 4,946,604; its unemployment rate jumped to 12.4%. In the first quarter of 2020, Georgia’s real GSP fell at an annualized rate of 8.7%. In the second quarter, it fell at an annualized rate of 26.7%.

In February 2020, Glynn’s labor force numbered 39,237; its unemployment rate, 3.4%. In April, Glynn’s labor force numbered 36,964; its unemployment rate, 16.4%.

The spike in Glynn’s unemployment rate is no surprise. The industry hit hardest by the pandemic was leisure and hospitality – Glynn’s largest industry. Leisure and hospitality typically accounts for around 22% of total employment in Glynn.

In the fourth quarter of 2019, leisure and hospitality employment in Glynn numbered 8,453. In the second quarter of 2020, it numbered 6,008.

The two economies clawed their way through the next five months, then surged in the last three. At year’s end, Georgia’s labor force numbered 5,166,537; its unemployment rate, 5.1%. Glynn’s labor force numbered 38,847; its unemployment rate, 4.8%. Leisure and hospitality employment in Glynn numbered 7,624.

To appreciate the rebound in Georgia and Glynn in the second half of 2020, note that the U.S., which was rebounding faster than any other nation, posted a year-end unemployment rate of 6.7%.

Extraordinary measures taken by the Federal Reserve in the first months of the pandemic caused the U.S. money supply to increase, from February 2020 to February 2022, by 40.5%. That caused the 12-month rate of inflation to increase from 1.4% in January 2021 to 9% in June 2022.

The Fed began its monetary tightening to check the inflation in March 2022. By August 2023, short-term interest rates were up four to five percentage points; medium and long-term rates were up three to four percentage points. And since August 2023, that’s where rates have remained.

In years past, monetary tightening of this magnitude would all but guarantee a recession. Thus far, our current Georgia and Glynn economies seem impervious to it. Georgia’s unemployment rate fell below 4% in July 2021 and has been no higher than 3.3% since November 2021. Glynn’s unemployment rate fell below 4% in April 2021 and has been below 3% more often than above 3% since November 2021.

A final note. In the U.S., leisure and hospitality employment has yet to surpass its pre-pandemic level. In Georgia, it did so in the second quarter of 2023; in Glynn, in the second quarter of 2022.