Job Growth

Question A: Ohio’s regulatory environment has a negative effect on job growth relative to comparable states.

Question B: Ohio’s tax structure negatively affects the location and retention decisions of high-skill workers.

Question C: Misalignment between Ohio’s education and workforce training systems and employer skill demands is limiting statewide job growth.

Question A: Ohio’s regulatory environment has a negative effect on job growth relative to comparable states.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Uncertain	6	Comparable states generally have comparable regulatory environment. Many regulations are bad for growth, but the absence of regulation is also terrible for growth--that is anarchy! I'd need more specifics to give a causal claim about job growth.
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Agree	8	Ohio has 246,033 regulatory restrictions, ranking it 6th in the nation, although the legislature is making a conscious effort to reduce this number
Ron Cheung	Oberlin College	Disagree	7
Kevin Egan	University of Toledo	Strongly Disagree	7
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Disagree	9
Vinnie Gajjala	Tiffin Univeristy	Agree	8
Will Georgic	Ohio Wesleyan University	Uncertain	5
Bob Gitter	Ohio Wesleyan University	Disagree	8	Compared to other states, our regulatory environment is not that strict. There may be an effect but if so, it is a small one.
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	No Opinion	1
Christian Imboden	Bowling Green State University	Uncertain	5
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Disagree	9
Bill LaFayette	Regionomics	Disagree	6	I don't think regulation (or lack thereof) is the reason. See below.
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Disagree	7
Michael Myler	University of Mount Union	No Opinion	5	These are important questions; but this is not my field of study. I have not done any research in this area. I do not field qualified to influence the outcome of your poll.
Joseph Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Uncertain	5
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Uncertain	5	I highly doubt that this is true but I do not have enough concrete evidence for an opinion. If the question was "Negative effects of Ohio's regulatory environment are overstated" then I would strongly agree. This is a talking point that is used a lot without strong evidence.
Albert Sumell	Youngstown State University	Disagree	7	I don't believe Ohio's regulatory environment has a meaningful impact on job growth in either direction
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Uncertain	5

Question B: Ohio’s tax structure negatively affects the location and retention decisions of high-skill workers.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Uncertain	6	Again, I'll need more specifics. Some parts of our tax structure are attractive to high-skill workers and other parts are not. I don't think anyone can measure the overall effect
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Disagree	7	the reduction in the top marginal rate from 3.5% to 2.75% makes Ohio's top rate one of the lowest in the nation, except for the handful of states that have no state income tax
Ron Cheung	Oberlin College	Disagree	8
Kevin Egan	University of Toledo	Strongly Disagree	8
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Disagree	9
Vinnie Gajjala	Tiffin Univeristy	Agree	8
Will Georgic	Ohio Wesleyan University	Disagree	7
Bob Gitter	Ohio Wesleyan University	Disagree	7	Our taxes are rather low at the state level and the state income tax may be reduced even more so this is not having much of a negative effect..
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Disagree	7
Christian Imboden	Bowling Green State University	Disagree	7	Ohio's tax code benefits richer workers. High skill workers tend to be richer.
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Disagree	9
Bill LaFayette	Regionomics	Agree	8	State taxes have been cut and cut, and the new flat tax structure benefits only high-income households. But this is a bait and switch. The state has financed these cuts by gutting the Local Government Fund and underfunding education and other essential services. This passes responsibility for these services to local governments that must raise funds as they can. The result is high local property taxes, sales taxes, and income taxes, and growing inequality between higher-wealth and lower-wealth jurisdictions. On top of this is the baffling array of local taxing jurisdictions that in itself imposes costs on business.
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Disagree	7
Michael Myler	University of Mount Union	No Opinion	5
Joseph Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Agree	8
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Disagree	8	Income taxes are not sufficiently high enough relative to other states to have a large effect on retention of high-skilled workers. Furthermore, the income tax has been reduced over the last 20 years without clear evidence of increased retention of those workers.
Albert Sumell	Youngstown State University	Disagree	7	Our tax structure is relatively low compared to neighboring states like PA and NY, but higher than most southern states.
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Agree	8

Question C: Misalignment between Ohio’s education and workforce training systems and employer skill demands is limiting statewide job growth.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Uncertain	6	Again, nothing is perfect, but some parts are well aligned and others are not. I'd need more specifics about what part you are focused upon to give an opinion. Without more focus, each respondent is is just going to be thinking about different aspects and talking past one another about issues that policymakers don't care about rather than focusing on something concrete that policymakers are interested in where analysis might have some leverage to change minds and shift policy.
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Agree	8	Ohio has pretty low educational attainment compared to other states, and even 40% of Ohio workers trained for manufacturing jobs tend not to get manufacturing jobs within a year, consistent with a mismatch of skills and demand for skills.
Ron Cheung	Oberlin College	Agree	7
Kevin Egan	University of Toledo	Strongly Disagree	8	I don't think any of these factors are in the top 5 reasons. I think number 1 is "quality of life" which includes so many things: quality of schools, quality of environmental amenities, quality of entertainment opportunities, affordability, etc. I think the role of the state is to collect the taxes it needs to support these quality-of-life attributes. A tax cut that starves funds for schools, roads, parks, and other public investments is a net negative.
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Uncertain	5
Vinnie Gajjala	Tiffin Univeristy	Uncertain	8
Will Georgic	Ohio Wesleyan University	Agree	7	This isn't the primary driver of the lack of job growth, but statewide job growth could be improved with better alignment between the skills which employers are seeking and the skills which potential employees may have.
Bob Gitter	Ohio Wesleyan University	Agree	7	This is somewhat true but the key is training in the soft skills for younger workers and I am not sure how this could be improved.
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Agree	8	I think this is a general American problem, not specifically an Ohio problem. I'd love to see more emphasis on trades and less on general college-level training.
Christian Imboden	Bowling Green State University	Agree	7	This is not unique to Ohio, however.
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Strongly Disagree	10
Bill LaFayette	Regionomics	Agree	7	Based on my work with educational institutions, linkages between these institutions and business need to be enhanced. It has always been important for graduates to leave school with the work-ready skills (communication, responsibility, integrity, leadership, teamwork, etc.) that can spell the difference between success and failure in a career. But now with the pace of technological change, schools need to keep up with the rapidly evolving needs of business, and graduates need to recognize that they must keep their skills current or run the risk of irrelevance.
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Agree	8
Michael Myler	University of Mount Union	No Opinion	5
Joseph Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Agree	7
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Disagree	8	This is probably true for a small subset of jobs but the forces affecting Ohio are more external. Long-term declines in manufacturing due to technology and trade have had a very negative effect in Ohio. And population change (mostly demographics but possibly some migration) have changed the potential workforce. Say that the potential workforce are people age 16-75. In 1980, 32% of those people were 16-29 (at the start of their careers) and 15.5% where 60-75 (at the end of their careers). In 2000 those numbers were 24.4% and 15.9% and by 2023 they were 21.4% and 24.4%. So the potential labor force is aging meaning less people likely to be available for work.
Albert Sumell	Youngstown State University	Agree	6	I don't have a strong opinion on this. I believe there is misalignment which can have an impact on our long term growth, but I'm not confident in how significant the misalignment is
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Agree	5