|
|
| (18 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | {{BlogPost | | {{BlogPost |
| − | |Title= Entrepreneurship and the 2016 Election (Blog Post) | + | |Has title= Entrepreneurship and the 2016 Election (Blog Post) |
| − | |Topic Area= Social Factors in Entrepreneurship | + | |Has author= Dylan Dickens |
| − | |Owner= Dylan Dickens
| + | |Part of series=Election 2016 |
| − | |Start Term= Summer 2016 | + | |Has content status= Published |
| − | |End Term= Summer 2016 | + | |Has Graphics status=Approved |
| − | |Status= Active | + | |Has blog image= |
| − | |Deliverable= Blog Post | + | |Has publication date=September 26 2016 |
| − | |Audience= General Public | + | |Has processing notes= |
| − | |Skills Needed= Writing I
| |
| − | |Keywords= Clinton, Trump, Election, Entrepreneurship, Small Business, Healthcare, Immigration, Regulation, Policy, Obamacare, Affordable Care Act
| |
| − | |Primary Billing=AccMcNair01
| |
| − | |Priority=3
| |
| − | |Due Date=NA
| |
| − | |Stage=BLOG_READY | |
| | }} | | }} |
| | | | |
| − | ==Abstract==
| + | The relative absence of entrepreneurship in election rhetoric from either party is disappointing. Job creation, protecting jobs, and getting the most out of the labor force are frequent topics of discussion. |
| − | Neither of the presumptive candidates, Trump and Clinton, have done a great job outlining their plans for small business and entrepreneurship. Rather than dig through past statements, this blog post links entrepreneurship to health care, government regulation, and immigration, and indirectly analyzes the candidates support for small business from there.
| |
| | | | |
| − | ==Text==
| + | However, both candidates have surprisingly little to say about entrepreneurship, the largest net creator of jobs in the United States. |
| − | :After a powerful 60-40 victory over fellow Democratic nominee Bernie Sanders in Puerto Rico this past Monday, supplemented with an additional wave of support from superdelegates, [http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/06/politics/hillary-clinton-nomination-2016/ CNN] declared Hillary Clinton the presumptive nominee for the Democratic party. She now joins presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump on still highly-contested and now highly predictable November 2016 presidential ballot. Over the course of the election, both presumptive candidates have remained, with the exception of Hillary's recent and non-specific [https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/small-business/ issue webpage] on small business, silent and non-committal on the topics of entrepreneurship and small business policy.
| |
| | | | |
| − | :In light of this information deficit, growing concerns over the future of entrepreneurship have been amassing, as demonstrated at the Kauffman Foundation's 2016 State of Entrepreneurship [http://www.gvhlive.com/gvh-daily/2016/2/23/is-entrepreneurship-at-risk-in-the-2016-election Address]. While specific candidate platforms have not been announced in regards to entrepreneurship, three of the main policy areas discussed in the election; health care, economic regulation, and immigration, all directly relate to the prosperity of an American entrepreneurship ecosystem. Through an analysis of Clinton and Trump's statements in these three topic areas, a better understanding of the potential post-2016 futures of entrepreneurship may come to light.
| + | Why is Entrepreneurship Policy Important? |
| | | | |
| − | :Health Care regulation, specifically the [[Affordable Care Act|Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act]], also known as "Obamacare," has been accused of [http://www.investors.com/liberal-study-finds-obamanomics-killed-the-american-entrepreneur/ "killing"] small business. A 2012 [http://www.gallup.com/poll/152654/health-costs-gov-regulations-curb-small-business-hiring.aspx Gallup] poll of small business owners found that nearly half of small business owners point to potential healthcare costs (48%) and government regulations (46%) as reasons why they are NOT hiring new employees. In spite of this survey, the 2009-2015 head of the Congressional Budget Office, [http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-small-business/ Douglas Elmendorf], and [http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-small-business/ John Arensmeyer], founder and CEO of the Small Business Majority, have both released statements questioning any long-term negative effects of the Affordable Care Act and have even suggested that there will be benefits. Little conclusive evidence has been found on the effects of the Affordable Care Act on small business one way or the other.
| + | The American economy relies on entrepreneurship. Micro and macro economists agree that it has resounding positive economic effects. Entrepreneurship has also been linked to non-economic benefits such as community development, social change, and an increase in egalitarianism. It is not hard to see why Entrepreneur magazine says entrepreneurs represent the “backbone of America.” |
| | | | |
| − | :Economic regulation, in a similar vein to healthcare reform, has been purported as a [http://www.investors.com/liberal-study-finds-obamanomics-killed-the-american-entrepreneur/ cause] for the decline in small business. In a 2015 [http://centerforregulatorysolutions.org/fixing-the-nations-broken-regulatory-system/ report] from the Center for Regulatory Solutions Karen Kerrigan, the president & CEO of the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council, suggests that a general streamlining and reduction of the United States' economic regulations would help the growth of small business. The 2016 [http://www.kauffman.org/neg/section-7#acceleratinggrowthbycurbingregressiveregulation New Entrepreneurial Growth Agenda] published by the Kauffman Foundation, proposes that reform in small business regulation and a decrease in regressive "barrier" regulation is the key to small business growth, and that increased regulations on larger companies may be beneficial. Across both theories little empirical evidence exists to show the effects of regulation on small business and rather are generated through the studies and opinions of experts in the field.
| + | U.S. entrepreneurship has two major categories. One is high-tech, high-growth industry like the kind seen in Silicon Valley or on Massachusetts Route 128. The other is the small to medium-sized enterprises owned by self-employed Americans. |
| | | | |
| − | :Immigration has been highlighted by the [http://sbecouncil.org/2014/07/21/entrepreneurship-immigration-reform-and-the-economy/ Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council] as a key issue in small business and entrepreneurship. The council cites a 2012 [https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/rs396tot.pdf report] from the [[Small Business Administration]] that reveals higher rates in business ownership, business formation, business exportation among the U.S. immigrant population as compared to the non-immigrant population. The council further quotes a 2014 Kauffman Foundation [http://www.kauffman.org/~/media/kauffman_org/research%20reports%20and%20covers/2014/04/kiea_2014_report.pdf report] in saying that "Immigrants were nearly twice as likely to start businesses each month as were the native-born in 2013," as well as [https://www.sba.gov/blogs/nation-immigrants-and-entrepreneurs Karen Gordon Mills], the former Administrator of the U.S. Small Business Administration, as saying: “In 2011 alone, immigrants started 28 percent of all new U.S. businesses, despite accounting for only 13 percent of the U.S. population." The array of above testimony seems to imply that a healthy intake of immigrants is an important component in a healthy entrepreneurship ecosystem.
| + | The 2008 recession caused a dip in U.S. entrepreneurship, disproportionately affecting these small firms. These enterprises experienced a drop of nearly 150,000 less than 1-year-old businesses between 2008 and 2010. High-tech, high-growth firms experienced a dip as well. Venture capital dropped from roughly 4,000 deals a year to 3,500 in the same period. |
| | | | |
| − | :Returning to the presumptive Trump v.s. Clinton ballot awaiting America in the Fall, it is imperative to review the two candidate's positions across these three areas. Hillary Clinton, whose website claims she will "be the small business president," takes a strong stance on healthcare, [https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/health-care/ vowing] to defend the Affordable Care Act and strengthen its benefits while minimizing its detriments in regards to small business. A position which reflects the ACA's seemingly sometimes positive, sometimes negative relationship with small business. In regards to economic regulation, Clinton does not appear to be shy, [https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/its-time-raise-incomes-hard-working-americans-hillary-clinton supporting] paid family leave, higher minimum wage, stronger unions, equal pay and 2010 Dodd-Frank financial regulation law. Her [https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/small-business/ small business web page] also claims that she supports reducing regulation and red tape on entrepreneurs however, once again reflecting both sides of an issue that academia has yet to find compelling evidence in. Finally, on immigration, Clinton [https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/immigration-reform/ proposes] comprehensive reform promoting immigration and integration with a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants and in defense of the many steps President Obama has made towards reform. On this issue Hillary Clinton seems to strongly support a healthy entrepreneurship ecosystem for the future.
| + | U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data shows that both high-tech firms and small to medium-sized businesses now approach pre-2008 levels. Venture capital investment in high-growth, high-tech firms has nearly doubled. According to PricewaterhouseCoopers data, aggregated investment dollars totaled $30 billion in 2013 compared to roughly $60 billion in 2015. |
| | | | |
| − | :On the other side of the aisle, Donald Trump wholly [https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/healthcare-reform opposes] the Affordable Care Act, stating that he will request a congressional repeal of the act on his first day in office. Furthermore, Trump proposes an absolute free-market approach to healthcare from there on out, a proposal that would have seemingly mixed results for small business. Trump has spoke out sweepingly against economic regulations and government interference as early as [http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/feb/7/no-ones-apprentice/ 2012]. While vehemently against economic regulation, Trump strongly [http://www.nationalreview.com/article/265269/trumped-daniel-foster?utm_source=jolt&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Jolt&utm_campaign=Jolt06232015 supports] the 2005 'Kelo v. City of New London' Supreme Court decision which allows for imminent domain to be invoked in cases where the government would generate more tax revenue. This record on government regulation would once again seem to indicate mixed results for small business. Finally, Trump has aggressively opposed immigration throughout the campaign, proposing to "[https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/pay-for-the-wall build a wall] between the United States and Mexico as well as [http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/07/politics/donald-trump-muslim-ban-immigration/ banning] Muslim travel to the U.S.. Trump then, seems squarely against promoting a healthy entrepreneurship ecosystem on the issue of immigration.
| + | Pew Research Center polling show an overall desire by the public to engage in entrepreneurial activities. The poll indicates 71% and 68% favorability rates for small businesses and tech firms respectively. Smart public policy is critical to harness this popular support and immense economic power. |
| | | | |
| − | :Regardless of who ends up sitting in the Oval Office come 2017, entrepreneurship will continue in the United States. Across the areas of health care, economic regulation, and immigration, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton differ greatly. While it may be difficult to determine the empirical effects of the Affordable Care Act and government regulation on small business at this time, Clinton appears to have the more flexible and entrepreneurship-focused stance on these issues. The fact that she is the only one of the two candidates to have an "issues" page on small business is a further testament to this. In the area of immigration, support for immigrants, both socially and politically, seems to bolster a healthy entrepreneurship ecosystem. In this issue and in the previous two Clinton seems to support this ecosystem better than Trump.
| + | Entrepreneurship in the 2016 Election |
| | | | |
| − | ==References==
| + | Discussions of entrepreneurship have been largely absent from the election. Many of the policy issues that have been discussed could indirectly impact entrepreneurship, especially those concerning economic regulation, immigration, and healthcare. Policies focused on areas adjacent to entrepreneurship, including capital investments, STEM research, and high-tech education, are also important. |
| − | Built in. See above for now.<!-- flush flush --><!-- flush flush --><!-- flush flush -->
| |
| | | | |
| − | [[Category: Internal]] | + | However, a primary focus should be on getting capital directly into entrepreneurship markets. Competitive capital is crucial - government money is sometimes invested in startups that are unlikely to succeed, which leads to a “crowding-out” effect. The government should invest along side competitive, returns-focused capital to promote the development of America's high-tech high-growth industry and its small business economy. |
| − | [[Internal Classification: Blog Post| ]]
| + | |
| | + | <!-- flush flush --><!-- flush flush --><!-- flush flush --> |
| | + | |
| | + | [[Category:Entrepreneurship Policy]] |
The relative absence of entrepreneurship in election rhetoric from either party is disappointing. Job creation, protecting jobs, and getting the most out of the labor force are frequent topics of discussion.
However, both candidates have surprisingly little to say about entrepreneurship, the largest net creator of jobs in the United States.
Why is Entrepreneurship Policy Important?
The American economy relies on entrepreneurship. Micro and macro economists agree that it has resounding positive economic effects. Entrepreneurship has also been linked to non-economic benefits such as community development, social change, and an increase in egalitarianism. It is not hard to see why Entrepreneur magazine says entrepreneurs represent the “backbone of America.”
U.S. entrepreneurship has two major categories. One is high-tech, high-growth industry like the kind seen in Silicon Valley or on Massachusetts Route 128. The other is the small to medium-sized enterprises owned by self-employed Americans.
The 2008 recession caused a dip in U.S. entrepreneurship, disproportionately affecting these small firms. These enterprises experienced a drop of nearly 150,000 less than 1-year-old businesses between 2008 and 2010. High-tech, high-growth firms experienced a dip as well. Venture capital dropped from roughly 4,000 deals a year to 3,500 in the same period.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data shows that both high-tech firms and small to medium-sized businesses now approach pre-2008 levels. Venture capital investment in high-growth, high-tech firms has nearly doubled. According to PricewaterhouseCoopers data, aggregated investment dollars totaled $30 billion in 2013 compared to roughly $60 billion in 2015.
Pew Research Center polling show an overall desire by the public to engage in entrepreneurial activities. The poll indicates 71% and 68% favorability rates for small businesses and tech firms respectively. Smart public policy is critical to harness this popular support and immense economic power.
Entrepreneurship in the 2016 Election
Discussions of entrepreneurship have been largely absent from the election. Many of the policy issues that have been discussed could indirectly impact entrepreneurship, especially those concerning economic regulation, immigration, and healthcare. Policies focused on areas adjacent to entrepreneurship, including capital investments, STEM research, and high-tech education, are also important.
However, a primary focus should be on getting capital directly into entrepreneurship markets. Competitive capital is crucial - government money is sometimes invested in startups that are unlikely to succeed, which leads to a “crowding-out” effect. The government should invest along side competitive, returns-focused capital to promote the development of America's high-tech high-growth industry and its small business economy.
