Date: Thursday, July 02, 2009 Location: MONTEVIDEO, MN Circulation (DMA): 4,800 (15) Type (Frequency): Newspaper (W) Page: 4A Keyword: Center For Rural Affairs

Too big to fail or too small to matter By Elisha Greeley Smith

CENTER FOR RURAL AFFAIRS

What does it mean to a community to lose a business like a car dealership? Sadly more rural communities are coming to grips with the loss of cornerstone, n~ainstreet businesses thanks to the dispro- portionate closure of rural dealerships.

Dealerships are owned by independent busii~ess people who not only provide a product and service, but also own real estate and inventory. According to a Chicago Sun-Times article, dealerships generate an average of $280,000 just in local sales tax. Franchised dealers are a vital part of the local economy and cornrnunity. They provide jobs, health care benefits and related business opportunities. And they contribute to other community institutions in myriad ways.

The closure of these dealerships is a severe economic blow to rural communities and counterproductive to rural economic development. Closing dealerships will not significantly affect the bottom line of GM or Chrysler. The dealerships pay for the cars they sell and assume a lion's share of the risk in the new car sales business. Firing the automakers' independent sales team is penny wise and pound foolish.

This decision epitomizes how federal policy can adversely impact rural communities by favoring the needs of industry and underesti- mating the importance of entrepreneurship. Congress should address the disproportionate rural dealership closures. And we should all learn the lesson that, if we invest in them, rural America's enuepre- neurs and small businesses can contribute to America's economic recovery precisely because they are neither too big to fail nor too small to mritter.

Page 1 of 1

Q 2009 MONTEVIDEO AMERICAN~NEWS All Rlghts Reserved

Account: 18209C (24272) MN~237

For reprints or rights. please contact the publisher

SPRING GROVE HERALD Date Wednesday, July 08,2009 Locatlon SPRING GROVE, MN Clrculat~on (DMA) 1 ,425 (1 27) Type (Frequency) Newspaper (W) Page 4 Keyword Center For Rural Affalrs

Government issues loolc dz'erent to rural residents

Publisher's I Notebook

* :

Opponents of a public health care option being propo\etl by Prebident Obariia often bring up the United States Postal Servic-e, noting that private companies, such as FcdEx and UPS. hccp the bloated, inefficient. go\mime~it- run Postal Service honest. They say that w~thout competrtion trom those pnvate companies, the USPS would be even more inellicient arid wastefill.

Now, I know the U.S. P(>sti~l Service isn't perfect. but tl1o.i~ of us in nrnl ,mas hncr a rliff'rrent perspective. Fm many of 11s. the postal servicc is the only rq~tiun. I can't get pribate c;urierr to drliwcr my newspapers. I've even ltn>kcrl into an independent privc~tc carrier and the price just can't nii~tch thc USPS. mainly becauce the tedenl agency delikers to all residents. rirl niatter how reniote they are f1o111 civilization. Some of our waders live in quite remote places that get fe\v visitors.

Let's turn that nrgumr~it iUot111d and imagine what it \\nuld be like if we aboliuhed tlie public clptirirl (>I' the USPS and relied on only priv:~tc cornpnies for dttliteq of Ic'tter\. n~ag:tzincs :mil I I L ' \ \ ~ S ~ I J X ' ~ I . \\i~lrld they refi15e serwice to I i o n ~ c ~ I ( K . : I ~ c ~ I miles from the nervest neighbur'! Would there still be pwt oliiccs in cities such as Canton, LVy kolT:md Eitzen? Would the cc#t of delivering a letter to n nrrnl route in Fillmore

County be more th:m the cost to deliver one to i1 home iri Rm~hr\tcr.'?

This isn't a plra to s u p p n Obama's health plan. It's illst a reminder that those of us in rural areas nrrd to Itx~h at i$.iues differently.

For example. Chrysler's bankruptcy restn~ct~rring nlaj Iqwlh fine ton judge in Wil\llingtr)l~. D.C.. but wveeding out the sln:~ll lia~lct~i\cc i$ a big thing for the small tcnvnc in which the majority of them we located. We're strll waiting lor a logical explanation sincc local dealers say the fraicliises dori't co<L C'lir~ rlcl-i~nyfliinp. A.;\u~ning hisgrr is kttcrji~\t d(w~ti't do i t for us.

Ifi~ll decisions arc based solely 011 swe or dc~~rity, tlic~i mrnl :urns \ \ i l l :~l\vays lwe. I t i\ more costly to ~leli\er \enices 111 7OSM)O ptvlple .iptrnJ tncr I .(MU) stlllilrc rnilc\ than IO.O(W) ~'c.clpl~ carrccntratccl in one wcliort I I ~ : I city.

Of course, morrcy nlw matters. If I ~ I I W 3 ) d N K ) lrlcll ~m?p l r represent ;I rlivc~\c incorns \while tlie 20.000 ill :I acctioii o1'a cilv an: i~llluent, Ilie nrral :ur:l i \ going to have ;I llarder tiriir :~r~r:lcriny :I ronip:lny to provide se~viccs c\cn il'tlnlsity wcrn~'t an ~ssue.

Tlic i~iip;~ct of cirt\ in Mi~l~iesota's L q ~ a l (io~r.rnnsnr rlitl dcxs not i l i t i l i r i i \ l ~ 11) I X ) I > L I I : I I ~ ~ T I i1.i 111~1ch ;is

services. I t isn't that they :ut' mtrt'e cliicicnt: r;~tlicr I(K.:II I:L\C\ CXI the much nicar valuable ~ ~ r o ~ ~ t y tirlly \ulJlnjll tile \ervicer 1lit.y provide.

clo\c don 11 5rnall to\\ 11 frnnclii~es, thc st;rlc's intent \v:~sti't to hurl rmnll to\\ II\. But the er~d result is just thnt. Kur;~l itreus generally have less

\\cillth. il s~nallcr p~pulntivn sprcad owr marc ~niler i~nd tlriy hubs. if th,~t is :\ti apt iiescviptrori lor the ~111;1ll to\\ 11s tli;if pro\ idc scn iccs. 111 otlrc~ ut\rcl\, SOIIIC i ~ r ~ l l i c i c r ~ c ~ is b~r~l t irito tlic rn[xlcl 110 rii;~tter what COIII~;III> or g ~ ~ ~ t l ~ ~ ~ n ~ e ~ i t i ~ l ilgency tr irs to prow idc gtxd\ or services.

hlti\t ~ r o p l c t t . ~ ~ d tu bc crll trnc \idc or the c~lllt-r rep;odinp gotemnient vs. pr1v31e CII ICI~>I kc. Some tee1 government is the answer to provide essential services to those in need. Othetx feel government by nature is wasteful and privatization is the only answer.

The debate for rural p p l e can't align so easily along political lines. Big government can focus on bailouts for Wall Street and ignore Main Street just as private enterprise wn ftxu5 on their affluent customers while dropping franchises on or near tlie main streets of small towns.

In the health care debate, more inipurtant than whether health services options are private or public is how they deal with r u d pnpularionc. Rural areas have more sniall businesses that dorl't have the numbers for huge group policies or perhaps the revenue for any policies to otter their employees. Runl mas have more people. particularly f m e r s , with indrvidud poldes. Rural areas have more poor and elderly residents.

If private enterprise is serving us well, then that is the preferred option kcinuse it fits in more with our frec market philosophy. Hoivever, surveys show that rum1 residents rn I\cice as likely to be underinsurd :ls urbun rcsidcnts and that 25 [X' l~" l t 0 1 n0n""qWl"te f:m1s

carry medical debt and 25 percent of those report that medical expenses "contribute to their tit~ancial Page I of 2 problems," according to the non-

Q 2009 SPRING GROVE HERALD All Rlghb Reserved

Account 18209C (24338) MN 326

For reprlnb or rights, please contact the publhsher

SPRING GROVE HERALD Date: Wednesday, July 08,2009 Location: SPRING GROVE, MN Circulation (DMA): 1,425 (127) Type (Frequency): Newspaper (W) Page: 4 Keyword: Center For Rural Affairs

pmfit for based in Nebraska. Those are signs that private enterprise isn't working as well as it should in rural areas.

As the discussion on health care changes unfolds, it is best to bypass the argument that a public policy is either going to save the day or ruin

our free enterprise system. Instead, the focus for us should be on the policies. pcarticularly how the options line up with rural denlographics and how they would serve more sparsely populated areas with a high proportion of self-employed people and stiiilll busitiesses.

Page 2 of 2

Q 2009 SPRING GROVE HERALD

All Rlghts Reserved

Account: 18209C (24338) M N ~ 3 2 6

For reprints or rights. please contact the publisher

CHA TFIEL D NEWS Date Wednesday, July 08 2009 Locatlon CHATFIELD, MN Clrculat~on (DMA) 1,761 (1 53) Type (Frequency) Newspaper (W) Page 3 Keyword Center For Rural Affalrs

Not all solutions seen in the .umbers for t

Opponents of a public health care option being proposed by President Obama often bring up the United States Postal Service, noting that private compa- nies, such as FedEx and UPS, keep the bloated, inefficient, government-run Postal Service honest. They say that with- out competition from those private com- panies, the USPS would be even more inefficient wd wasteful.

Now, I know the U.S. Postal Service isn't perfect, but those of us in rural areas have a different perspeSti%.-~or many of us, the postal service is the only option. I can't get private carriers to deliver my newspapers. I've even looked into an independent private carrier and the price just can't match the USPS, mainly because the federal agency delivers to all residents, no matter how remote they are from civilization. Some of our readers live in quite remote places that get few visi- tors.

Let's turn that argument around and imagine what it would be like if we abol- ished the public option of the USPS and relied on only private companies for delivery of letters, magazines and newspa- pers. Would they refuse service to homes located miles from the nearest neighbor*? Would there still be post offices in cities such as Canton, Wykoff and Eitzen? Would the cost of delivering a letter to a rural route in Fillmore County be more than the cost to deliver one to a home in Rochester?

This isn't a plea to support Obama's health plan. It's just a reminder that those of us in rural areas need to look at issues differently.

ural reside For example, Chrysler's bankruptcy

restructuring may look fine to a judge in Washington. D.C.. but weeding out the small franchises is a big thing for the small towns in which the majority of them are located. We're still waiting for a logi- cal explanation since local dealers say the franchises don't cost Chrysler anything. Assuming bigger is better just doesn't do it for us.

-. If all decisions are based solely on size

or density, then rural aieas-will always - . lose. It is more costly to deliver services to 20,000 people spread over 1,000 square miles than 20,000 people concentrated in one section of a city.

Of course, money also matters. If those 20,000 rural people represent a diverse income while the 20,000 in a section of a city are affluent, the rural area is going to have a harder time attracting a company to provide services even if density weren't an issue.

The impact of cuts in Minnesota's Local Government Aid does not diminish by population as much as it does by tax base. More affluent suburban cities, which are also more densely populated, don't rely on state aid to provide essential ser- vices. It isn't that they are more efficient; rather local taxes on the much more valu- able property fully support the services they provide.

Just as Chrysler's intent wasn't to close down small town franchises, the state's intent wasn't to hurt small towns. But the end result is just that. Rural areas general- ly have less wealth, a smaller population spread over more miles and tiny hubs, if that is an apt description for the small towns that provide services. In other words, some inefficiency is built into the model no matter what company or gov- ernmental agency tries to provide goods or services.

Most people tend to be on one side or thc other regarding government vs. private

enterprise. Some feel government is the answer to provide essential services to

Page 1 of 2

Q 2009 CHATFIELD NEWS All Rlghb Reserved

Account 18209C (24360) MN 57

For reprlnb or rights please contact the publhsher

CHA TFlELD NEWS Date: Wednesday, July 08,2009 Location: CHATFIELD, MN Circulation (DMA): 1,761 (153) Type (Frequency): Newspaper (W) Page: 3 Keyword: Center For Rural Affairs

those in need. Others feel government by nature is wasteful and privatization is the only answer.

The debate for rural people can't align so easily along political lines. Big govern- ment can focus on bailouts for Wall Street and ignore Main Street just as private enterprise can focus on their affluent cus- tomers while dropping franchises on or near the main streets of small towns.

In the healkcare debate, more impor- tant than whether health services options are private or public is how they deal with rural populations. Rural areas have more small businesses that don't have the num- bers for huge group policies or perhaps the revenue for any policies to offer their employees. Rural areas have more people, particularly farmers, with individual poli- cies. Rural areas have more poor and elderly residents.

If private enterprise is serving us well, then that is the preferred option because it

fits in more with our free market philoso- phy. However, surveys show that rural residents are twice as likely to be underin- sured as urban residents and that 25 per- cent of non-corporate farms carry medical debt and 25 percent of those report that medical expenses "contribute to their financial problems," according to the non- profit Center fm Rural Affairs based in Nebraska. Those are signs that private enterprise isn't working as well as it should in rural areas.

As the discussion on health care changes unfolds, it is best to bypass the argument that a public policy is either going to save the day or ruin our free enterprise system. Instead, the focus for us should be on the policies, particularly how the options line up with rural demograph- ics and how they would serve more sparsely populated areas with a high pro- portion of self-employed people and small businesses.

Page 2 of 2

Q 2009 CHATFIELD NEWS

All Rlghts Reserved

Account: 18209C (24360) MN~57

For reprints or rights. please contact the publisher

A T n Date T h u r s d a v , Julv 09 2009

Page 4 Keyword Center For Rural Affa~rs

Not all solutions seen in the numbers for rural residents

Opponents of a public health care option being proposed by President Obama often bring up the United Stares Postal Service, noting that private compa- nies, such as FedEx and UPS, keep the bloated, inefficient, government-run Postal Service honest. They say that with- out competition from those private com- panies, the USPS would be even more inefficient and waqteful.

Now, I know the U.S. Postal Service isn't perfect, but those of us in rural areas have a different perspective. For many of us, the postal service is the only option. I can't get private camers to deliver my newspapers. I've even looked into an independent private carrier and the price just can't match the USPS, mainly because the federal agency delivers to all residents, no matter how remote they are from civilization. Some of our readers live in quite remote places that get few visi- tors.

Let's turn that argument around and imagine what it would be like if we abol- ished the public option of the USPS and relied on only private companies for delivery of letters, magazines and newspa- pers. Would they refuse service to homes located miles from the nearest neighbor? Would there still be post offices in cities such as Canton, Wykoff and Eitzen? Would the cost of delivering a letter to a rural route in Fillmore County be more than the cost to deliver one to a home in Rochester'?

This isn't a plea to support Obama's health plan. It's just a reminder that those of us in rural areas need to look at issues differently.

For example, Chrysler's bankruptcy restructuring may look fine to a judge in Washington. D.C., but weeding out the small franchises is a big thing for the small towns in which the majority of them are located. We're still waiting for a logi- cal explanation since local dealers say the franchises don't cost Chrysler anything. Assuming bigger is better just doesn't do it for us.

If all decisions are based solely on size or density, then rural areas will always lose. It is more costly to deliver services to 20,000 people spread over 1.000 square miles than 20,000 people concentrated in one section of a city.

Of course. money also matters. If those 20,000 rural people represent a diverse income while the 20,000 in a section of a city are affluent, the rural area is going to have a harder time attracting a company to provide services even if density weren't an issue.

The impact of cuts in Minnesota's Local Government Aid does not diminish by population as much as it does by tax base. More affluent suburban cities, which are also more densely populated. don't rely on state aid to provide essential ser- vices, It isn't that they are more efficient; rather local taxes on the much more valu- able property fully support the services they provide.

Just as Chrysler's intent wasn't to close down small town franchises, the state's intent wasn't to hurt small towns. But the end result is just that. Rural areas general- ly have less wealth, a smaller population spread over more miles and tiny hubs, if that is an apt description for the sniall towns that provide services. In other words, some inefficiency iq built into the model no matter what company or gov- ernmental agency tries to provide goods or services.

Most people tend to be on one side or the other regarding government vs. private enterprise. Some feel government is the answer to provide essential services to

Page 1 of 2

Q 2009 NEWS RECORD All Rlghb Reserved

Account 18209C (24372) MN 191

For reprlnb or rights, please contact the publhsher

Thursday July 09 2009 MABEL MN

Page: 4 Keyword: Center For Rural Affairs

those in need. Others feel government by nature is wasteful and privatization is the only answer.

The debate for rural people can't align so easily along political lines. Big gove'rn- ment can focus on bailouts for Wall Street and ignore Main Street just as private enterprise can focus on their affluent cus- tomers while dropping franchises on o r near the main streets of small towns.

In the health care debate. more impor- tant than whether health services options are private o r public is how they deal with rural populations. Rural areas have more small businesses that don't have the num- bers for huge group policies o r perhaps the revenue for any policies to offer their employees. Rural areas have more people. particularly farmers, with individual poli- cies. Rural areas have more poor and ,

elderly residents. If private enterprise is serving us wet).

then that is the preferred option because it fits in more with our free market philosb- phy. However. surveys show that rural residents are twice as likely to be undehn- sured as urban residents and that 25 per- cent of non-corporate farms c a n y medical debt and 25 percent of those report that medical expenses "contribute to their financial problems." according to the non- profit Center for Rural Affair% based in Nebraska. Those are signs that private enterprise isn't working as well as it should in rural areas.

As the discussion on health care changes unfolds. it is best to bypass the argument that a public policy is either going to save the day o r ruin our free enterprise system. Instead. the focus for us should be on the policies. particularly how the options line up with rural demograph- ics and how they would serve more sparsely populated areas with a high pro- portion of self-employed people and small businesses.

Page 2 of 2

Q 2009 NEWSRECORD All Rlghts Reserved

Account: 18209C (24372) MN~191

For reprints or rights. please contact the publisher