Lori Sturdevant: Let's peer into the demographic crystal ball

For wise words about the decade just dawning in Minnesota politics, I consulted one of my favorite political prognosticators.

Tom Gillaspy won't be warming a delegate's chair at any party's convention, in this or any other election year. As Minnesota's state demographer for 30 years, he has acquired the habit of rigorous nonpartisanship.

But as half of the soothsaying team that's developed local renown as the Two Toms -- Gillaspy and Stinson, demographer and economist, respectively -- Gillaspy has a lot to say that's relevant to what will unfold politically in these parts in the new decade.

He didn't utter the "demography is destiny" cliché -- but he might have. Gillaspy argues that the life cycle of the biggest generation of voters, the baby boomers born between 1946 and 1964, explains a lot about where Minnesota has been politically for the last half-century, and about where it's going.

For instance:

•"Increasing taxes is going to be increasingly difficult," he said. That's not because the Woodstock generation has bought into conservative rhetoric about excessive government. It's because too many boomers don't like the looks of their personal balance sheets as they approach retirement.

•But Minnesotans will still look to state and local governments for services they deem essential. "It's a time for triage," Gillaspy said. "We have to prioritize. What is it that we really must do and need to do, vs. what would we like to do. We may not be able to do things in the latter group."

•For an aging population, government essentials almost certainly include health care. But, Gillaspy predicted, the big health issue in the next decade won't be how to extend health insurance to more people. "The real issue will be: How can you provide health care to most people and pay for it?" Health care costs are demographically destined to grow to unprecedented, uncomfortable levels. Debates about how to pay that tab likely will become a fixture in state and national politics.

The biggest challenge for Minnesota's future lies in the willingness of tax-averse, aging, health-minded voters and their elected officials to keep investing in education. "Investment in the future has to be at the absolute core" of what a society considers essential if that society is going to prosper, he said. "Our ancestors saw that. Many people aren't seeing that right now. They haven't noticed that the height of the [educational] bar is increasing. A high school diploma only gets you to first base. You haven't scored yet."

What's worrisome is that Minnesota's high school completion rates are falling, even as it's increasingly clear that the state's best advantage in the global economic game has been and will be a well-educated, productive workforce. This state has no other obvious trump card to play.

My own crystal ball shows some 2010 politicians glossing over Minnesota's education imperative by pointing to the state's still-high rank among the states on academic measures. Call them the deniers. They won't acknowledge that the whole nation's academic performance has been slipping.

Others will claim that Minnesota can maintain its educational edge without spending more money. They're the half-righters. Some benefits could come from smarter spending of current public education dollars -- say, for example, paying colleges not for students enrolled but for courses completed.

But existing budgets can't be stretched far enough to pay for two things that could make the biggest difference -- early childhood education for at-risk preschoolers and more affordable access to grades 13 and 14 at community and technical colleges.

Gillaspy predicts that some smart candidate will succeed by selling the idea that education is not a personal matter.

"We need to cultivate the idea that this is a public investment. We ought to think, 'When a young person achieves, he makes my life better.' We need to think of education not as yours or mine, but as ours."

• • •

Harking back to Minnesota's glorious past will have limited political value, Gillaspy implied, as voters realize they are in uncharted waters.

"We're in the midst of really dramatic changes here," he said of the state's aging population and globalizing economy. "This is not something that's akin to previous recessions. What we're seeing -- a population aging as a whole -- has never happened before in any society in the history of the human race."

But one piece of Minnesota's past remains very relevant, we agreed. In 1933, 1947, 1957, 1967, 1971, 1992 -- all reform years at the Legislature -- Minnesota politicians proved that they could be creative designers of new public policies to make the most of changing circumstances. That tradition of inventiveness needs to be reclaimed, and revived.

Lori Sturdevant is a Star Tribune editorial writer and columnist. She is at lsturdevant@startribune.com.