Not surprisingly, housing costs top the list of economic challenges, but its margin of victory over the business tax burden is interesting. (Editor’s Opinion: Of course, if the question were framed as a quid pro quo, a new business tax to support affordable housing, I think that margin would evaporate instantaneously.) The cost of housing continues to be a paramount concern for businesses seeking to attract and retain skilled employees.
Massachusetts has the third-highest housing prices in the country, and 53 percent of the chief executives surveyed chose ”high cost of living” as the state’s biggest economic challenge, far outpacing the 17.9 percent who cite the tax burden.
”Talent and ideas are the real fuel for the leading companies in Massachusetts,” said Monique da Silva, managing director of MS&L Boston, the global public relations and communications firm that helped develop and conduct the Globe survey. ”It’s clear that executives here are concerned about their ability to continue to attract the human capital they need to continue to grow and innovate. They are worried that economic factors beyond their control will cost them their competitive edge.”
The second story focuses on the Governor’s race, showing that while a plurality of respondents support Kerry Healey, a stronger plurality believe that Tom Reilly will win the race.
The Globe 100 survey of more than 100 chief executives from public companies based here and other major state institutional and corporate employers found that Lieutenant Governor Kerry M. Healey won the largest plurality of support, 40 percent. But 46 percent predicted Democratic Attorney General Thomas F. Reilly will win, and 29 percent support Reilly’s candidacy. . .
Despite independent candidate Christy Mihos’s business background, no one surveyed expects him to be elected governor, and only 8 percent see Democratic ex-venture capitalist Christopher Gabrieli in the corner office. (Editor’s Note: There were no numbers for Deval Patrick.)
Unfortunately, there is no link to the complete survey results, but here is how the survey was conducted.
How the survey was conducted: The confidential questionnaire for The 2006 Globe 100 survey of chief executives was developed by Globe business editors in collaboration with MS&L Boston, a global public relations and communications agency. The survey was conducted by MS&L Boston staffers using e-mail and Internet survey tools between April 10 and May 4.
As far as surveys go (with their limited scientific value), this is a really encouraging sign for Democrats and Tom Reilly in particular. It is a very good sign that while 46% of respondents think Tom Reilly will win (and at least 56% think a Democrat will win if you add in Gabrieli’s 8% and the possibility of Patrick’s unreported support), only 40% are compelled to support Kerry Healey’s candidacy. The fact that Reilly is only 11% off Healey’s pace in direct support also shows that her plurality of support within the business community would be strongly mitigated by his own.
So, is the business community ready for a Democratic Governor? It seems that all three of our candidates have something to offer and that there is already some appeal for Tom Reilly. What messages should our candidates be sending to the state’s job creators? In my opinion, the state’s economic development focus should be on higher education and transportation because that is where we can get the most bang for a buck, but I’m sure that there are other thoughts and that is what these threads are for.
At the risk of being tacky by being the first person to respond to my own post, I do have one thought/question regarding the story’s indication of strong support for the healthcare law from those surveyed: how would these numbers break down by business size? The story says this about those surveyed:
<
p>
<
p>
Doesn’t sound like many/any small businesses. Since all of the surveyed companies already likely provide healthcare to their employees, is the two-thirds support noted above “soft” support, i.e., “Hey, we’re already doing it, so why not make the other guy do it too.!” Would the companies that are actually going to be affected by the employer mandate present stronger opposition to this rather unaffected group within the business community? All of which is to say, is there really buy-in from the business community on the healthcare law, as suggested by the article?
It’s obvious the Globe is pulling for Reilly … this article is full of fluff, and unscientific polling trying to prove his viability.
<
p>
Who in their right minds includes “non-profits” as a representative voice of the business community? It’s oxymoronic: non-profits=business community. How many of the 115 respondents do they represent? (Didn’t see a list … was there one?) I bet they included an AFSCME executive. Maybe the Dean of Faculty at Harvard, too.
<
p>
And why are you so encouraged about who these guys “think” might win? That’s never been a reliable predictor of elections anywhere. Right now a plurality of those 115 “registered voters” (also a shaky polling base)in the article prefer Healy. How the leftover Patrick/Gabrielli/Mihos votes break is anyone’s guess right now.
<
p>
Finally, I bet these 115 CEOs represent 10% of MA employment. Maybe less. With no small businesses responding, it’s a minority opinion, and mostly meaningless. Except to burnish Reilly’s standing. It’s like polling 115 Hollywood studio executives … that’s 115 votes all leaning far left. No one cares.
First of all, nonprofits are a very sizeable part of the economy. I suggest looking at MassINC’s report, “The Massachusetts Nonprofit Sector: An Economic Profile.” MassINC requires registration (your provide your email) to download it’s reports for free. A quick summary of the report:
<
p>
<
p>
Bottom line: any survey of employers should include our nonprofits.
<
p>
Second, the survey is encouraging because it suggests that the business community is not strongly opposed to the notion of a Democratic Governor. In fact a relatively good number appear to be supporting Tom Reilly and a majority believe that a Democrat will win in November. For reasons discussed in my post below, this has very real implications for the gubernatorial race and for future public policy: healthcare, housing, etc.
<
p>
Finally, I noted that this was a survey and the Globe noted that this was a survey. It’s not a comprehensive poll. It is what it is: a little bit of insight into the thinking of the business community on a number of issues.
<
p>
As a lifelong resident who would like to spend the rest of my life in Massachusetts, I happen to care what businesses are saying because they will have considerable say in what kind of quality of life my family and my state’s families will lead.
Who cares? Why should I care what business execs think? I’m much more concerned about the common men and women, the people who desperately need help, the people who often can’t even afford to stay in Massachusetts.
<
p>
2. The business community exerts a tremendous amount of influence on public policy. Example: When Boston proposed the Community Preservation Act, it was single handedly defeated by a campaign financed by one of the city’s largest employers. There are countless examples like this one in municipal government and on Beacon Hill. Therefore, it is somewhat encouraging to see that at least some portion of the business community appears to be on board with the healthcare law and concerned about housing costs.
<
p>
3. Businesses employ most of the “common men and women” who “desparately need help” that you are reference. In fact, a healthy private sector accomplishes more for the average person than government can ever accomplish due to economics – government cannot afford to solve every problem. Businesses will provide the healthcare, build the housing, and even solve the environmental challenges.
<
p>
As a party, there should be a prominent place at our table for business leaders, just as their is for labor and any number of important constituencies that will help move this state forward again.
Still don’t care all that much. I take the musings of a handful of people with a grain of salt. Perhaps I should poll the local Starbucks and see how they feel about the issues?
<
p>
As far as I’m concerned, I’m working against a few individuals being able to buy elections. I’m sick of them. I want elections back in the hands of the people, not special interests, not only the extrordinarily wealthy.
<
p>
Businesses exist because we allow them to exist, it’s not the other way around. They don’t get special privileges and I don’t care how they feel about issues of importance because they rarely represent what would benefit the vast majority of the people.
Their opinions matter just as much as yours and mine. Personally, I care how they feel for all of the valid reasons mentioned above.
<
p>
As the late Senator Paul Tsongas was fond of saying, “You can’t strangle the goose that lays the golden egg.” They are not all Halliburtons and we shouldn’t dismiss them as such.
On an important article. The fact that these execs are ready for a Dem governor is good news, as you say. Aside from their power to direct the economy and the workplace, they also have significant social influence. Plenty of ambitious middle-manager types look to their CEOs for their opinions and tastes. And for lots of people, the company is their strongest social influence outside of family.
<
p>
None of our candidates (their shriller supporters notwithstanding) are given to anti-corporate populist rhetoric. It’s interesting that the only one who does indulge in it from time to time – Reilly – appears to have the business community’s confidence. I guess he’s made it clear his only corporate targets are the wrongdoers.