Limited Government? Keep an Eye on Florida
By Randall Holcombe • Wednesday January 5, 2011 11:07 AM PDT • 8 Comments
With both the federal and state governments in the United States seemingly headed the way of Greece, Florida appears to have the best prospects among the states for limited government.
Florida already is among the lowest in per capita state government spending, and in state government employees per capita. and is one of the few states without a personal income tax.
The recession has hit Florida relatively hard. The state has 12% unemployment, well above the national average, and the real estate collapse hit Florida harder than most states too. But the legislature responded by cutting the state budget. Four years ago total state appropriations topped $74 billion. Appropriations fell as low as $66 billion during the recession, and are $70.5 billion this year.
Unlike some states, when revenues declined, the legislature cut expenditures to match, and opposed tax increases. If you like limited government, Florida looks pretty good already. But, things may look even better.
Florida inaugurated a new governor January 4: Rick Scott. Governor Scott’s background is in the health care business, where he made a fortune, and used more than $70 million of his own money to finance his campaign. He doesn’t owe big political favors to campaign contributors. He says he wants to “run government like a business” (whatever that means), has proposed additional tax cuts, including eliminating the state’s corporate income tax, he wants to cut prison spending by reducing the prison population, he wants to eliminate regulations that stand in the way of business activity. He wants Florida to have a smaller government and a business-friendly climate. (The weather is already pretty good.)
It would appear that Governor Scott should not find much resistance in the state legislature, which is heavily Republican, and with both Houses headed by fiscally conservative leaders. Senate President Mike Haridopolos unsuccessfully tried last year, before he was president, to place a constitutional tax and expenditure limitation on the ballot. He’ll have more power this year, and has stated his intentions to try again. Both Haridopolos and House Speaker Dean Cannon are committed to limiting a state government that is already lean by national standards.
To summarize, my arguments that Florida has as good a chance to reign in state government spending, taxation, and regulation as any state are that (1) it is already a small government state by national standards, and (2) the incoming governor and legislature have a sincere commitment to further limiting the scope and power of the state.
Because conditions are so favorable for limiting state government in Florida, the state bears watching.
If, a few years down the road, we see a more limited government in Florida, that points to the possibility that it could happen in other states. That possibility must be tempered by the realization that few states will have a political alignment that is as favorable toward limited governemnt as Florida’s is now.
If, a few years down the road, we see politics as usual in Florida, and state policies are directed more by lobbyists, interest groups, and politicians trying to buy political support in future elections, that would be a sign that there’s not much of a chance for limiting the power of government anywhere.
Keep an eye on Florida.
Tags: Budget and Tax Policy, Politics, The State 
To run government like a business can only mean to run it for profit. The question is whose profit, the voters or the politicians?
Dan Good | Jan 8, 2011 | Reply
“When you look at unbalanced people, how they respond to the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government. The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous. And, unfortunately, Arizona I think has become sort of the capital. We have become the Mecca for prejudice and bigotry.
“It’s not unusual for all public officials to get threats constantly, myself included. And that’s the sad thing of what’s going on in America. Pretty soon, we’re not going to be able to find reasonable, decent people who are willing to subject themselves to serve in public office.”
Dan Good | Jan 9, 2011 | Reply
No. The question is what YOU consider “profit”, and for the record, income redistribution in ANY form doesn’t count.
In case you haven’t managed to figure this out yet, at the SAME TIME you’re looking to pick someone else’s pocket, someone is looking to pick YOUR’S.
Theft is Theft. Period.
Eric | Jan 10, 2011 | Reply
Your post has nothing at all to do with the article, but since you brought it up I’ll address it.
Within an hour of the shooting there was enough information in the public domain to know that the shooter was a pot smoking, Communist Manifesto-reading left winger. So I understand the desire you folks have to blanket the media with accusations that somehow “right wing” rhetoric caused the incident. You’re hoping that if you shout it loud enough and long enough that the lie will override the truth. Leaving aside the very real “Glass House” issue The Left has with that accusation, the simple fact is that Loughlin’s action not only had NOTHING to do with ANYONE’S political rhetoric; they also had nothing to do with anything that any of us would recognize as sane thought processes.
Sarah Palin is no more responsible for this tragedy than Jodie Foster was for the attempted assassination of Reagan.
Eric | Jan 10, 2011 | Reply
I appreciate the authors sentiment and hope for smaller government in Florida, yet the evidence of the history of California,NY and several other states shows that democratic government will Always keep growing until it goes bankrupt or otherwise falls apart.
Pataki,Schwarzeneger,Reagan, how many politicians have claimed to both plan on and have the ability to reduce government. Every one one of them failed completely. Government can’t be run by a business because it forces it’s products on it’s ‘customers.’ It has no way of knowing what is profitable or not,because it’s not in the business of making a profit, it’s in the business of politics.
I’m sorry but waiting for Florida state government or any other government to reduce itself is like waiting for 3 card monte dealers to stop ripping off the marks so badly.
I would say the thing to do is try to do the best one can in investment and business in the coming economic chaos and maybe 20 years from now the entrepreneur community will be large enough to put politicians out of business, politicians will never do that to themselves. Look to expand entrepreneurship, don’t believe what any government says for a minute.
Joe | Jan 10, 2011 | Reply
From the UK, where Govt spending amounts to more than 40% of GDP (Gross Domestic Product), I have a view of what is really propels the growth of Govt Spending. It is very largely driven by the personal ambitions of every civil servant (as state employees are known here), and especially those in middle management. The importance of one’s office is nearly always determined by the number of staff under one’s control. It has very little to do with the actual or relative importance of the function of that office.
Much effort, therefore, is devoted to justifying the need for additional staff. Given the fact that each new member of staff requires ‘servicing’ by his or her supervisor, the Personnel department, the Training department, the office accomodation department, filing, stationery, furniture and equipment, IT support services etcetera etcetera, the actual increased productivity of this new recruit is like to be less than 50% and s/he will have reduced everyone else’s productivity by a fraction that cannot be easily measured and that is therefore best ignored. In the UK, central and local government staff take, on average, around 15 days pa in sickness leave compared with around 6 days pa in the private sector.
‘Ambition creep’ is not confined to govt of course; it happens in medium and large companies too. The difference there is that alert senior management spot the budget increase and nip this in the bud – or lose a chunk of their bonus. In govt, there is no such check until, as we found out last year, the Govt
finally ran out of our money and our bank managers (the international financial community) put a limit on the overdraft. The problem is compounded, of course, by the overwheening ambitions of the politicians desirous only of demonstrating there generosity (with our money) and proving what good chaps they are and how we should continue to vote for them.
John Harrison | Jan 11, 2011 | Reply
I agree with Joe – government is not a business, and can’t be run like a business. If government were a business, it would have gone out of business a long time ago because, as Joe mentioned, nobody wants the products and services it offers.
It would be better for politicians to vow to cut government down to its Constitutionally-approved roles. At least that would be the correct way of looking at the problem, although, in the end, it would prove just as impossible to accomplish given the current political climate.
Antonio Germano
Antonio | Jan 11, 2011 | Reply