For a happier new year, Seattle and the state need to think big
It's about time for the state to take advantage of its relationship with China, by investing now in schools, transportation, and trade.
Let’s face it, the last few years have been pretty depressing all the way around. People are struggling to hold on to their homes and health care, and to provide for their children’s education. Meanwhile, we’re stuck in two wars and rebuilding two countries that most analysts believe would be the same whether we left now or in 2014.
And our state government is forced to make deep cuts that hit those who can afford it least: the working poor. It’s hard to be optimistic about the future.
But in the spirit of the New Year and hope, I offer the following as evidence that our best days are indeed in front of us. That is, if we dare to be bold and take advantage of our uniquely competitive position as a region.
Washington state is positioned to become one of the most important players in the most important relationship in the world — the one between America and China.
And the key to developing a strategy to take advantage of future opportunities lies with us: our schools, transportation and trade infrastructure, and the creativity and energy of our Puget Sound region. The White House and the Brookings Institution have finally recognized the importance of urban regions in fueling the national economy and are shifting policies and funding strategies to acknowledge and foster regional strengths.
The White House is keen to develop an export strategy in order to jump start the economy. Governor Gregoire talks up exports, as well, emphasizing just how trade-dependent our state really is. And we have the infrastructure in the Puget Sound to be an export power. It’s hard to find another area that has as much potential to increase manufacturing and produce agricultural products, and that has ports as strategically located for access to the growing Asian markets.
A recent KUOW program detailed how the growing wealth in China was leading to an infatuation with French wines — much to the delight of the French. We make quite a bit of wine in Washington state too, along with many other products that could help tip the trade balance in our favor in the very near future. But in order to export high-value products, we need innovators and a place for them to develop, land for manufacturing, and access to ports and rail infrastructure.
The executive director of the Puget Sound Regional Council, Bob Drewel, is working to help leaders understand the importance of thinking as an economic region. The Prosperity Partnership, formed after the region successfully ensured that the Boeing 787 would be made here — or at least put together here — is refocusing its efforts. Now the partnership is working to develop the next generation of planning and advocacy: the Regional Business Plan, aimed at understanding our strengths and weaknesses in order to guide government investments in education, infrastructure, and technology.
The advocacy role of the partnership is more important than ever. But taking advantage of our strengths and opportunities won’t be easy and will require optimism and forward thinking.
The devastating cuts in the state’s budget threaten to weaken many of the advantages our region enjoys. Cuts to the University of Washington, and higher education generally, come at a time when we most need an educated workforce and strong research institutions. If we put higher education out of reach for our citizens we threaten our economy and the upward social mobility that has always been America’s promise. And if we starve higher education of public support, we will weaken our ability to develop the cutting-edge products of the future that no one has even thought about yet.
Similarly, we need to continue to invest in our infrastructure in a timely manner to both attract and retain the large employers and the startups. There is no better time to do that than right now, with the positive bidding environment and high unemployment in the construction sector. The countries that are on the rise are doing this. India, Brazil, and China are growing fast and investing in their ports, rail, roads, bridges, and transit. Our economic growth rate is anemic at 3 percent compared to the rates of growth in China, India, and Brazil, all over 8 percent.
Optimism is on the rise in those countries as well, while an ever larger number of Americans believe our best days are behind us. According to a Pew Research Center poll, 87 percent of Chinese believe their country is moving in the right direction compared to 30 percent of Americans.
I believe this pessimism is partly responsible for our inability to do big things. This is why locally we see our elected leaders shrinking back from big challenges and instead “playing small ball” by taking on highly localized issues like bike lanes, phone-book bans, and urban chickens. These are good issues to tackle, but they are not going to give us what we really need: a competitive region that produces jobs for our people.
Local leaders need to better understand the interrelationships between the public and private institutions that drive our economy.
At a recent Seattle City Council meeting, Councilman Mike O’Brien questioned Seattle Port Commissioner Gael Tarleton about the need to compete against other ports for import business. The discussion began during a port briefing on international competitiveness, the widening of the Panama Canal in 2014, and the rise of new and expanding ports. O’Brien questioned why we wanted to increase imports as it was a symptom of our culture of consumerism and ultimately damaging to our environment.
I absolutely agree that we cannot continue to be a consumer- and service-based economy, and that is why I disagree with O’Brien’s comments. Let me explain. The Puget Sound ports of Tacoma and Seattle began as export-driven ports. While it’s true that they are largely import-driven now, with 70 percent of imports moving to Chicago and points east, the empty containers returning westward by rail are export opportunities for this state's homegrown products.
In a recent Seattle Times opinion piece, Joseph Borich, president of the Washington State China Relations Council, wrote about Washington state’s unique relationship with China and the opportunities that it affords. We benefit greatly by our exports to China; our trade deficit is only 13 percent while the national trade deficit is a whopping 326 percent. Our state exports to China in 2010 will likely reach $9 billion. And with the trends in China what they are — increased wealth and a large and growing middle class — there is no limit to how much that figure can grow.
But we have to understand what our exporters need and how that relates to our import facilities. In fact, during the shipping downturn of the last two years, there was a container shortage for exporters. So every import is an export opportunity.
Additionally, having strong ports and the accompanying infrastructure — roads, bridges, and rail — means that we would be well-positioned to develop and ship the new products of the future to the growing middle and upper classes in China and the rest of Asia. Boeing also needs the port and the manufacturing area that surrounds it for suppliers as it turns out a 737 every day of the month from its Renton plant.
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism. Become a member of Crosscut today!











Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds
Comments:
Posted Thu, Dec 30, 8:13 a.m. Inappropriate
The concept may be sound, but where's the money for the investments supposed to come from?
Posted Thu, Dec 30, 8:28 a.m. Inappropriate
As usual, Mr. Royer's perspective is skewed by the 20th century belief that we will have endless supplies of cheap oil to fuel a global trading exchange. How does he factor the probable cost of gas in 2020 into his scenario?
Posted Thu, Dec 30, 8:44 a.m. Inappropriate
When it comes to education, one major opportunity is Chinese language for children. The Beacon Hill Elementary School in Seattle has a big wait list for its dual language program. This shows there's a lot of interest from parents and children already.
The challenge is fitting Chinese or any other language for that matter into the school day. Middle and High school students rarely have space to fit in another class. The elementary day is jammed for most students as well. We need to rethink how children are exposed to non English languages and figure out a way to fit it into the school day.
Posted Thu, Dec 30, 9:36 a.m. Inappropriate
Uhhh... First you're going to have to get on these tails (environmental "groups", clean-energy "advocates", agenda-ed bureaucracies) that wag the dog.
http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/energy/blogs/giant-port-to-send-coal-from-america-to-china-hits-snag
Posted Thu, Dec 30, 11:06 a.m. Inappropriate
Interesting that the one obvious name that didn't get dropped here is our dynamic, can-do former governor, Gary Locke. As the current Commerce Secretary and a son of Chinese immigrants who has assiduously cultivated contacts in his ancestral land, it says quite a mouthful about his perceived value that he didn't even rate a passing mention in an article dedicated to opportunities for expanding Pacific trade.
Posted Thu, Dec 30, 11:24 a.m. Inappropriate
Great article, Jordan. I couldn't agree with you more. Only one thing missing. Where does the tax revenue come from to pay for these investments? Robert Reich's recent book "Aftershock" speaks to the same issues but includes his proposals for revenue generation - i.e. levying a higher tax on those who have benefitted the most from the past investments in education and infrastructure and have largely 'earned' their income from favorable government policy, the very wealthy. Likewise, "Winner Take All Politics" by Hacker and Peirson tell a similar story. When the wealthiest 1% "earn" over 25% of all income in 2007 (and it's only gone up since then), then the source of future public investment has to lie within their bank accounts. If we don't have the political courage to tax those who enjoy the fruits of all of our labors and benefit from our public policy, then we're simply continuing the same old conversation democrats and republicans have had since the days of Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton, that is, we can have it all but we don't have to pay for it.
Posted Thu, Dec 30, 11:58 a.m. Inappropriate
Jordan: Timely piece. A couple additional thoughts:
--The starting point for anything is a balanced, functional state economy.
That means fewer subsidies (including for exporters) but a progressive tax system, relatively low business and personal taxes, improving productivity, a modern transportation system (not weighted toward boondoggles such as Sound Transit light rail), and better allocation of public resources. The state, right now, is facing a budget crisis because it has spent too freely and unwisely on many of the wrong things.
---Quality public education, of course, will be vital. Here we must increasingly think accountability and standards. In higher education, we cannot expect the legislature to finance overinflated salaries for administrators and sports coaches while academic standards suffer and
faculty flee elsewhere. From K through 12, we cannot equate the teachers-union agenda with improvement in public education. (Just as we cannot
equate the public-employee union agenda with improved governance). Is public education in the state preparing our kids to perform at high levels?
---Always chancy to focus on an "export strategy." Countries enjoy trade surpluses and deficits, for the most part, because of the fundamentals in their domestic economies. A growing domestic economy will run a trade deficit because it is sucking in imports. A slack economy, on the other hand, might be running a temporary trade surplus. A weak currency encourages exports yet, overall, is seldom in the overall national interest. Too often "export strategies" are undertaken at the expense of liberalized trade and can be challenged as protectionist. The U.S. lodges such challenges frequently. The best path to prosperity, in a global economy, flows from global liberalization of movement of goods, services, and money.
You are entirely correct that our region, situated on the Pacific Rim,
will succeed or fail economically because it does or does not produce internationally competitve goods and services. Adequate port and related facilities will be important, as you say, because we will at times be net exporters, at other times net importers. Trade, and associated economic activity, will take place in either case.
Posted Fri, Dec 31, 11:10 a.m. Inappropriate
Beware bogus, money laundering, faux-type public sector jobs that mostly exist in the government hierarchy of special district, school district, local, county, state and federal sacred cows. America supposedly has 156.3 million jobs; 26 million in all gov't levels if I read the latest Labor Dept. stats correctly. There are millions of 2-3 job folks so the number of workers is less than 50% of the 309,000,000 Americans according to the April 1,2010, count by the U.S. Census Bureau. The ups and downs of metro area and state economies and port rivalries are pretty trivial in the big picture as Texas itself almost competes with the other 49 laggards. God Bless Texas! And, Happy New Year!!
Login or register to add your voice to the conversation.