🔒Small business is no Sikorsky

We recently saw state lawmakers overwhelmingly approve a deal to entice Sikorsky Aircraft to remain in Connecticut valued at a dramatic $220 million. That's a lot of hard-earned taxpayer dollars to ensure that another large corporation does not depart Connecticut like General Electric did.

Unfortunately, the agreement that passed the legislature during the special session did nothing to address the underlying impetus causing employers to explore states outside of ours. And lately, Hartford's only response to these situations has been to spend more money that the state does not have in hopes of staving off continuing job and revenue loss.

Sikorsky departing would have dealt a tremendous blow to our economy on all levels. Not only would thousands of jobs have been lost but small businesses would have felt the ripple effect as supply chains would dry up and customers along with revenue would be lost. The company's decision to stay should not be taken lightly, however, neither should the cost of keeping them here.

Once again we see lawmakers put in the unenviable position of deciding which sectors and businesses should “win” and therefore others “lose” as they use tax dollars instead of carrots to keep large employers in place. But what about the state's largest employer, small business owners? What incentives is state government providing to ensure that they do not pack up and head to greener economic pastures? While the answer for some may be that the state doesn't do nearly enough, the bottom line is that most small business owners don't seek out such assistance either. All they seek is a stable environment that is conducive to success and provides room to thrive.

Unfortunately, and frustratingly so for many small business owners, there are indeed times when it is necessary to provide incentives to companies in order to compete with neighboring states; thus is the nature of the economic development “arms race” states find themselves in today. But how effective, or sustainable, is this economic hunting as opposed to economic gardening? This deal was an incredibly expensive yet easily avoidable solution to a problem that was created by a state government with a spending problem. Call it a $220 million manifestation of a refusal by elected officials to act on the warnings of the business community that over regulation and burdensome taxes are simply unsustainable for employers of a variety of sizes.

The numbers speak for themselves; people are leaving Connecticut and taking their tax dollars with them. We have fewer small business owners and fewer jobs and for those still fighting to survive here, fewer customers to appeal to. We are losing on average 1,000 small businesses a year and each time that one closes up shop, jobs are lost and communities are left with a void. And yet week after week, we see another national ranking that places Connecticut at the bottom of the barrel. Whether it is tax burden or business climate, we have become a poster child for what not to do in order to improve an economy.

Some politicians would decry business owners and advocates who point out these national statistics as being overly pessimistic, rooting for failure, or bemoan them for failing to adapt to changing times. However, the reality could not be further from the truth. Small employers inherently take risks, make changes and ultimately will sacrifice whatever necessary to ensure their doors remain open. Their very nature is to work hard and ask for little in return but they do ask for a fair playing field and a certain level of predictability.

At the moment in Connecticut, the only continuity in our economy is lackluster performance and bleak economic forecasts. Small business owners feel the deck is stacked against them when it comes to maneuvering the bureaucratic maze of state government and that hiring additional people is more expensive and burdensome than necessary.

The good news is that incentivizing most small business owners does not require tax dollars or complicated legislation. Getting state government's own fiscal house in order will not only help retain businesses, both large and small, but it will encourage new growth and increased entrepreneurship. By focusing on reduced state spending, and therefore fewer tax increases and a lower cost to do business, certainty will increase right along with the jobs that are created.

When lawmakers stop spending the hard-earned money of small business owners and imposing new labor mandates, in return they will see employers investing in their own places of business. Whether it's hiring additional workers, buying new equipment or expanding their scope of sales, everyone wins when small business owners can grow. Hundreds of millions of dollars are not necessary to provide the state with economic growth and the chance to finally prosper.

Sikorsky remaining in Connecticut comes at a high price and hopefully with equally high results, but without backing up the deal with legislative changes for the rest of the business community, it alone will not be enough to improve our overall economic conditions. Let's root for success for Sikorsky, of course, but don't let it end there. Let's all remember to root for success for our state's largest employer, small business.

Andrew is the Connecticut state director of the National Federation of Independent Business.