Right-to-Work is Good for Business: Wisconsin Beats Minnesota

Does a right-to-work state do better than a forced unionism state?

Some unions, desperate to hold onto what little political might they claim, like to draw comparisons between adjacent states who differ on this labor question.

One of  the most often reported distinctions falls between Minnesota, a forced-unionism state, and Wisconsin, which went right-to-work in 2015.

The Republican Eagle provides further differences:

People love comparing the economic performance of Scott Walker's Wisconsin to Mark Dayton's Minnesota. Both governors were elected in 2010 and took their states in dramatically different policy directions. Walker lowered taxes, ended collective bargaining for public employees and eventually made Wisconsin a right-to-work state. Dayton raised taxes on the rich, raised the minimum wage and worked to expand public unions. Most of these policies were implemented between 2013 and 2015.

The argument went for a long time that Minnesota' economy was still doing better than Wisconsin's. The main reason, however, for the slower recovery in the Dairy State rests on the deeper recession which the state had plunged into.

Besides, states moving into Wisconsin from other states are not going to kick-start into robust growth overnight. The development of a stronger recovery will develop over time.

The news has gotten better for Wisconsin:

But it's also becoming harder to argue Minnesota bests Wisconsin. While economic output and income remain higher in Minnesota, Wisconsin employment numbers are now besting Minnesota. The accompanying chart shows Wisconsin total employment minus Minnesota total employment, which shows employment has been growing far faster in Wisconsin for over four years. Since February 2013, Wisconsin's employment lead over Minnesota nearly doubled, growing from 70,108 jobs to 138,383 jobs in June 2017.

Let's not forget during hard economic times, especially throughout the Rust Belt, whatever savings which households got from tax cuts, they probably kept the money rather than spending it. 

Right-to-work is good for workers, it's good for businesses, it's great for unions, and best of all, the reform helps businesses to expand, hire more workers, and grow the economy. It's also been great for Republicans as a whole, and conservatives in particular because taking away public sector unions near-monopoly on all collective baragaining has facilitate pension and entitlements reforms, both at the local as well as the state level.

Wisconsin has the smallest pension liability of all 50 states:

That is a good thing, folks. More businesses are moving into the state, as well, and the tax burden has decreased considerably for Wisconsites across the board. 

Will Minnesota voters decide on a similar, pro-growth change of pace? Election 2018 will prove pivotal for the Land of 10,000 Lakes. Will Minnesota turn into a red state paradise, including right-to-work reforms? We shall see.

It's looking pretty solid, however, that Republicans will take over the lower chamber, and Republican gubernatorial candidates are looking strong enough to flip the Governor's mansion into their own column, too.

Minnesota a Red State in 2018?

Has a right-to-work bill been introduced in the Minnesota State Legislature? The last attempt occurred in 2012, around the same time that Michigan's right-to-work law passed, despite the most violent attempts to stop its passage. The political momentum rests with the freedom to work movement, and if the Supreme Court does not strike down forced union dues, very likely two or three more states will join the other 28 freedom to work states in the next year.