Forbes ^ | 06/09/2012 | Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson, Grove City College
“Most of the 10 poorest states are Republican” is a quote of CNN’s Jack Cafferty. It appeared in his “Cafferty File” blog last September 22, and was accompanied by the opinion, this is “something the GOP can’t be too comfortable with.” Indeed, in an election year, you can bet that Democrats will try to make hay with those data.
My previous column made the case that Democratic Party policies have induced the impoverishment of America’s poorest cities. Turnabout is fair play. If Republican policies have led to the economic stagnation of entire states, whereas Democrats are only responsible for ruining cities, then the Dems might have the stronger campaign talking point. Let’s examine the 10 poorest states to see if Republicans are to blame for their relative economic standing.
The poorest states, based on per capita income, are, from first to last: Mississippi, Arkansas, Tennessee, West Virginia, Louisiana, Montana, South Carolina, Kentucky, Alabama, and North Carolina. Of these, exactly half—Arkansas, Kentucky, Montana, North Carolina, and West Virginia—have Democratic governors and three have Democratic majorities in the lower house of their legislature, so these state governments can hardly be classified as completely Republican. On the other hand, only North Carolina voted for Obama in 2008, so in that sense, these states may be leaning Republican.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
A common analytical error is the “post hoc ergo propter hoc”
fallacy—“after this, therefore because of this.” For example, chronic federal
deficits became chronic in the 1960s. What changed in America at that time?
Alaska and Hawaii were added to the union in 1959 and 1960, respectively;
therefore, the erroneous assertion to follow is that we need only expel those
two states from the Union to solve our deficit spending problem. Absurd, right?
Similarly, we can’t facilely assume that the lower per capita incomes in the 10
poorest states were caused by Republican policies.
Looking at the list of the 10 poorest states, all except Montana are east of
the Mississippi River. That means they are older states. Those nine also happen
to be concentrated in the South. This is significant: They were all slaveholding
states. They focused on producing commodities, whereas the northern states
produced more value-added goods, more manufactured goods, more capital-intensive
goods.
In short, those nine erstwhile slaveholding states have been lagging behind the northern states economically for two centuries. Just because one generation of leaning Republican has not eliminated a disparity that was entrenched for centuries, it is not an indictment of Republicans.
In short, those nine erstwhile slaveholding states have been lagging behind the northern states economically for two centuries. Just because one generation of leaning Republican has not eliminated a disparity that was entrenched for centuries, it is not an indictment of Republicans.
