Business move to Boston matters — a lot
Tolls are so central to Gov. Ned Lamont’s economic development plan that he might think United Technologies would not be leaving Connecticut for Massachusetts if we had congestion pricing on our major highways.
UTC’s leaders have been discreet in discussing the reasons they chose Boston over Greater Hartford for the corporate headquarters of the merged Raytheon Technologies, but it probably has nothing to do with transportation. Boston’s commuting challenges are considerably more challenging than Hartford’s.
The UTC merger announcement unleashed the irresistible temptation among political leaders to minimize bad news and exaggerate good news. The merger of the two sophisticated manufacturing giants will mean a loss of 100 jobs in Connecticut, which, given other economic reverses the state has suffered, seems not so terrible, according to a host of Democrats.
What they are not acknowledging is that the location of a corporate headquarters matters. It’s where a company is more likely to invest in economic development and assume the role of corporate citizens in a region. We will lose that.
UTC has pledged to add 1,000 new jobs at jet engine manufacturer Pratt & Whitney, which continues to be based in East Hartford, but that’s out of a projected increase of 25,000 jobs in the next several years, according to news reports. Both UTC and Raytheon are global companies. Competing on that scale requires them to place jobs around the world, so even internally, there is a constant competition among component parts for jobs and investment.
The UTC announcement, which appeared to catch leaders by surprise, prompted calls for more investment in science, technology, math and engineering (STEM) education. The jobs are there, but the trained workers are not. Here’s a sobering fact that garners little attention in our public policy debates: Connecticut has fewer students to educate. The combined effects of the loss of jobs, the flight of families and the shrinking economy contributed to a decrease in the number of school-age children in the state.
There will be added emphasis on educating the children who are here and attempting to attract more to higher education STEM programs. Lamont could signal his serious intentions by clearing out the political actors in our higher education system. One of former Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s terrible policies was to lard the highest levels of the system with political allies with little expertise in education as rewards for their loyalty. This is no one’s recipe for improving the state’s higher education system.
Lamont can signal his seriousness of purpose by appointing someone from outside politics to lead the University of Connecticut Board of Trustees. Democratic lobbyist and former Speaker of the House Thomas Ritter is serving as the temporary head of the board. Lamont would make a grievous error if he supported Ritter to become the permanent chairman. It would mark the governor as more interested in politics at the worst possible time.
The UTC merger and move adds one more name to the painful list of significant companies that have left. UTC is the bigger of the two combining companies, and it still chose to leave Connecticut. Aetna could have been on its way to Manhattan if Rhode Island-based pharmacy giant CVS had not purchased it and kept it in Hartford.
The health care insurance industry, which provides tens of thousands of state jobs, felt like it was under siege from state government this spring. State Comptroller Kevin Lembo proposed that the state government go into the health insurance business and compete with Connecticut companies. Lamont’s support of the proposal ebbed and flowed. The details of the proposal were revealed late in the session and prompted a ferocious reaction by health insurance companies and other state businesses. U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat, recently announced he supports a Medicare-for-All proposal that could eliminate private health insurance.
In any iteration, if that idea becomes law, Connecticut could lose thousands of high-paying jobs.
Here’s a suggestion that’s free. Our political leaders would help the state’s economy by ceasing to act like they loathe the people who take the risks that generate the money that funds state government. They may not like them when they are here, but they miss them when they’re gone.