The Daily Caller

The Daily Caller
Republican presidential hopeful Texas Gov. Rick Perry speaks during a "Welcome Home Rally" at Abel Republican presidential hopeful Texas Gov. Rick Perry speaks during a "Welcome Home Rally" at Abel's on the Lake in Austin, Texas, on Saturday, Aug. 20, 2011. (AP Photo/Michael Thomas)  

Club for Growth gives Perry generally favorable review, with some caveats

The Club for Growth, a limited government advocacy group, gave Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s record on economic freedom a generally favorable review Tuesday.

In its tenth analysis of a 2012 presidential candidate, the Club for Growth found fault with several of Perry’s policies during his time in office, but speculated that should he become president he will move the country in a more “pro-growth” direction.

The Club praised the governor for his low tax, limited spending policies but noted that his record is not without flaws, foremost among them his support for what the Club terms “corporate welfare” to attract businesses to Texas.

“On the bad side, however, Perry has also aggressively used government spending to attract jobs to Texas. During his time in office, Perry has signed into law two major economic development initiatives, the Texas Enterprise Fund and the Texas Emerging Technology Fund,” the Club pointed out.

“The Texas Enterprise Fund, established at Governor Perry’s request in 2003 has doled out $426 million since its inception to attract businesses like JP Morgan Chase and Frito-Lay,” they continued. “A similar program, the Texas Emerging Technology Fund, was created in 2005 and signed into law by Perry. That fund has doled out $259 million in capital for “cutting-edge research and technology” entrepreneurs. Economic development initiatives like these, often supported by big business, create huge market distortions in a place that should naturally be a nationwide leader in attracting jobs.”

The Club says that such initiatives indicate that Perry is more interested in business than free markets, nonetheless, they assert that should Perry win the White House the country would likely end up on a more “pro-growth” path. (RELATED: Perry leads in Iowa, Bachmann slipping)

“It is likely that Rick Perry would seek to move the country in a much more pro-growth direction,” said Club for Growth president Chris Chocola in a statement. “However, his support for taxpayer-subsidized funds to lure jobs away from other states and his contradictory stance on energy mandates reveals an interventionist streak rather than a consistent dedication to free-market principles.”

The Club noted that during his long tenure as governor, Perry enjoyed a generally conservative legislature, something he likely will not have should he become president.

“With a more hostile legislature to deal with in Congress — and an even worse economic climate — it is debatable whether a President Perry would maintain his generally conservative fiscal approach,” added Chocola. “In any case, Congress could learn a thing or two about economic growth from the Lone Star State, and that’s partly because of Governor Perry.”

Follow Caroline on Twitter

Watch:

  • TruthFirst

    We need Roe vs Wade as a national law, which it is.  Leaving it up to states would doom it in states where the right fringe shouts very loud, and it would eventually lead to having abortions only in back room places.  Very very frightening.

  • Rosco1776

    Oh good, another Bilderberger pick so nothing will really change. 

    Ron Paul 2012, the only candidate not bought and paid for.

  • Patrick Henry

    This article ends with a very curious conclusion, “Perry enjoyed a generally conservative legislature, something he likely will not have should he become president.”
    Where in the world did he come up with that idea. The GOP currently holds the House and could easily take the Senate on Perry’s coattails.

    It is most likely that Perry just like GWB will come into office in 2013 with solid majorities in both Houses of Congress. What he does with it in the first 2 years will tell us everything.

    The article also makes a big deal about his use of “corporate welfare” to attract jobs to Texas. Although I personally hate “corporate welfare” (esp. at the Fed level) I believe the Club for Growth is confusing the use of it at the state and federal level.

    The Federal gov. operates in a competitive vacuum, states do not. If for instance all the states that surround Texas are doling out the “Corp. Welfare” should the governor of Texas sit still and watch a couple hundred thousand jobs be sucked out of his state?

    We all hear about Corporate Welfare all the time but no one ever takes the time, case by case, to explain what it is in a particular instance. Is it a state income tax abatement in exchange for 1,000′s of jobs?  Is it giving a sweetheart deal on a piece of useless state property to build a plant that employs 10′s of 1,000′s of auto workers??

     Is it a loan of state funds designed to never be re-paid to house the home office of a big and powerful corporation–for instance The NY Giants. The devil is in the details.

  • Rymndschwart

    Rick Perry has stated that Medicair, Medicaid, Social Security, are un-constitutional and should be abolished.

    There are 77 million Americans receiving Social Security checks every month. I have to believe that most of them can vote.

    Why would anyone currently receiving Medicair, Medicaid, Social Security vote for Rick Perry?

    • Patrick Henry

      Could you please document that? If that is true I would like to know.

  • joeaiello

    The Club for Growth, which backs limited government, is behind Gov. Perry and now it comes out that the largest number of new jobs in Texas are federal jobs. Very funny!

    • Patrick Henry

      Where did you get that little factoid from?? Mother Jones or The Nation?

    • Patrick Henry

      Where did you get that little factoid from?? Mother Jones or The Nation?

  • Pingback: Jeb Bush denies any Bush family vendetta against Rick Perry | Fess Up, Florida!

  • Humorless

    He’s white, male, and non-Mormon.  He can talk “Jay-zus” to the Religious Right and pretend to be a “fiscal conservative” for that group.   And he can abandon all that once he gets the Nomination so that he can “tack Center” for the General Election, because he’s a savvy politician who only wants to win ….for Republicans who only want to win and could care less if he goes “RINO” after he’s elected as long as he’s pro-business, even croney capitalist.