The Fruits of Your Labor

In light of Hurricane Harvey's devastation of Houston, I found this piece by Sheila Kennedy (another local blogger and a favorite of mine) to be most enlightening. An excerpt:

Last year, for example, a ProPublica/Texas Tribune investigation found that officials charged with addressing Houston’s obvious susceptibility to flooding had discounted scientists’ warnings as “anti-development.”

That reaction was so typically Houstonian.

For years, Houston has reveled in its “freedom” from “onerous, unnecessary regulations.” 

I suppose Houston, and Texas writ large, and any other area of the country, has the right to implement policies that they believe are in their interests. This is the very essence of federalism. This piece highlights that Houston, presumably after weighing the costs/risks/benefits, decided that doing things like regulating how much concrete a developer can put down or how much wetland can be drained is not worth the cost of doing so.

As I said above, I suppose this is Houston's prerogative. Of course, it reminded me of another common story that we in Indiana hear often about Illinois' budget problems. See here, here, and here, for but a few examples. We often hear horror stories about how the federal government (i.e. the citizens of Indiana, among others) will have to bail out Illinois' failing budget obligations.

I can't help but link the two stories together.

Illinois, like Texas, has the prerogative to set policies that it believes are in its own interest. If Texas wants to pave over wetlands, perhaps that is their right. If Illinois wants to put itself in debt guaranteeing pensions to its public employees, perhaps that too is their right.

The problem comes when they externalize the costs of those policies. As it sits, the citizens of relatively eco-friendly Vermont, Massachusetts, and California are going to be on the hook for the policies of Texas, that surely the citizens of eco-friendly states would view as "penny wise and pound foolish." Similarly, the citizens of Indiana, Tennessee, and Kentucky may be on the hook for the policies of Illinois, which those of us in fiscally prudent states may view as "profligate."

My point is not to evaluate any of these policies on their merits, because all public policy is typically a choice between imperfect options. Perhaps Illinois could have been stingier with their pensions, but they determined that doing so would have a negative effect on their public workforce. Perhaps Texas could have been stricter in its environmental and building regulations, but they determined that doing so would stifle development.

At risk of repeating myself, this is their prerogative. However, it is not their prerogative to externalize the costs of their decisions onto their fellow citizens. If I want to quit my job, that means that I would have more free time to spend with my kids. However, I don't think that I have the right to expect my neighbors to cover the negative externalities of that decision (i.e. I have no right to expect my neighbors to pay my mortgage or buy my groceries).

Of course, there are exceptions to this rule. However, it really sticks in my craw when I hear Texas politicians (who constantly lecture the country on personal responsibility and making fiscally sound decisions) now approach the federal government with their hands out, seeking a bailout from the predictable consequences of their policy decisions.

As you sow, so too shall you reap.