Economic Impact of the Texas Medical Center on Southeast Texas

Home , Southeast Texas, Texas Medical Center

Houston Business A Perspective on the Houston Economy

Great cities share common features: power- ful economic and political ties to the rest of the Houston’s medical globe; world-class museums and cultural facilities quarter, located on to present the arts, music and entertainment to its citizens; great universities that participate in research South Main, is the and lively debate; and a fine medical quarter. The largest concentration of medical quarter typically provides three products: medical care, medical research, and training for medical facilities in the doctors and other medical staff. Houston’s medical quarter is located just out-

FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF DALLAS HOUSTON BRANCH October 2001 world, with 61,041 employees on campus side downtown on South Main and is dominated by the 42 member institutions of the Texas Medical and 5.4 million patient Center (TMC). TMC’s structure is very different from visits in 2000. the usual cluster of university-affiliated schools, hospitals and clinics. It is the largest concentration of medical facilities in the world, with 61,041 employees on campus and 5.4 million patient visits in 2000. This article reviews the history and structure of the Texas Medical Center. It is a unique Texas story. Our main purpose, however, is to look at TMC’s economic impact on southeast Texas, in both dollars and jobs, and to provide some perspective on this impact relative to other institutions in southeast Texas and elsewhere.

HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE Monroe Dunaway Anderson built one of Houston’s great fortunes early in the 20th century. Under Anderson’s tight-fisted management and adept risk taking, he and his partner, Will Clayton, built their company, Anderson Clayton and Co., into one of the world’s largest cotton brokerages at a time when cotton was the financial king.1 A somewhat shy personality and lifelong Among the sponsors of the campus institutions bachelor who was generous to nieces and are Texas A&M University, Texas Woman’s nephews, Anderson believed strongly that University, University of Houston, University of money, if used properly, could be a construc- Texas, Prairie View A&M University and Hous- tive influence. ton Community College System. Over $573 mil- When he died in 1939, Anderson left $20 lion in research was conducted in 2000; $2.2 million—roughly the equivalent of $141 mil- billion in research has been carried out over lion in today’s dollars—to the M. D. Anderson the past five years.3 Foundation. Rather than stipulate specific uses Since 1945, the Texas Medical Center has for the money—uses he thought might be been chartered as a not-for-profit corporation. bypassed by time and technology—he simply TMC serves as manager of the campus prop- stated four broad goals for the foundation: erty, which, with its 12 miles of streets and 42,000 parking spaces, is a city within the • Improvement of working conditions city. Acting through a policy council made up • Establishment of institutions for the care of the chief executive officer of each institu- of the sick, aged and incompetent tion, TMC serves as a moderator of campus- • Improvement of living conditions wide issues, such as strategic planning or generally or for particular groups master planning. Advisory councils and other • Promotion of health, science and groups consider more specific issues, such education as security, volunteer services, government The foundation’s trustees gave money to relations and information systems. Once con- Rice University and University of Houston but sensus is reached among the members, TMC soon focused their efforts on the Texas Medical implements campus policy. The center finances Center. Seeking to lure the University of Texas’ its activities primarily through gifts, grants and new cancer research hospital to Houston, the campus parking fees. trustees offered a $500,000 grant, temporary TMC continues to encourage growth and quarters and land for a permanent hospital site. development by buying or receiving gifts of The trustees purchased 134 acres near Her- land, which it makes available to member insti- mann Hospital to house the new M. D. Ander- tutions for $1 per year. However, the attrac- son Hospital for Cancer Research. They then tiveness of TMC almost certainly extends used land and cash as incentives to attract beyond free land. The complex has achieved other institutions. A state dental school and many of the cost-reducing economies of scale Baylor College of Medicine, in a dispute with that are inherent in any large cluster of com- the Dallas medical community, soon followed. mon activity. First, TMC is squarely within the By 1946, five hospitals had been approved for medical information loop— a critical feature to admission, and the U.S. Naval Hospital, later attract top researchers, academics and physi- the Veterans Affairs Medical Center, was under cians. The proximity of Rice University, Uni- construction. The foundation had been laid for versity of Houston and Texas Southern University the Texas Medical Center. TMC’s formula for provides cross-pollination of ideas and projects. drawing medical institutions to a common Along with $573 million in ongoing TMC re- campus may have been a bit unorthodox, but search, 2,622 short courses, seminars and work- its success would continue for years to come. shops were held on or near the campus in 2000. Second, the 61,041 campus employees pro- THE TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER vide a large pool of local talent for employers. TMC has grown to more than 700 acres and Likewise, employees feel comfortable moving 22 million gross square feet of space in over to Houston and working in TMC, knowing there 100 permanent buildings. In 2000, the campus is a wide range of employers from which to had 6,014 licensed beds in 15 patient care facil- choose. Finally, medical suppliers of every kind ities, including six general care hospitals and locate close to the medical center to be near seven specialized hospitals.2 There were 16,547 customers. These characteristics all work to students attending regular classes in two med- lower the cost of operating within TMC, in- ical schools, four nursing schools, a dental creasing its attractiveness to member institutions. school, a college of pharmacy, various health TMC has further promoted low-cost opera- science programs and a magnet high school. tion by providing common services through 2 which significant economies of scale can be Table 1 captured: a thermal energy cooperative, a hos- Economic Impact of Texas Medical Center pital laundry cooperative, a graphics commu- (Year 2000 Operations) nications group, library facilities, a conference Direct local expenditures within region Millions center and a campus newspaper. In several TMC and affiliates $2,063.6 Faculty and staff $409.1 cases, these organizations have become TMC Students $133.2 member institutions in their own right. Visitors $29.4 Total direct expenditures $2,635.3 ECONOMIC IMPACT OF TMC Secondary expenditures due to TMC The model employed in this article to mea- Added regional production $1,581.2 sure TMC’s economic impact was developed in Income-induced spending $1,607.5 the 1970s by the American Council on Educa- Total regional expenditures $5,824.0 tion as a conservative standard for colleges and Direct and indirect personal income $3,861.0 universities to demonstrate their economic impact Employment (number of workers) on the local community.4 It treats the university Direct 61,041 as if it were an export industry, like tourism or Indirect 81,560 business travel, providing educational services Total 142,601 to students drawn from outside the community. SOURCE: Texas Medical Center; authors’ calculations. Because many medical centers are built around medical schools and their associated hospitals replace what was removed from local shelves. and research facilities and are often part of the Some part of the new orders will be directed to larger university, the methodology has frequently local companies, and more business-to-busi- been extended to concentrations of medical ness transactions occur within the community, facilities as well. This supports not only the use ultimately sparking several rounds of additional of the methodology in this study but also our purchases. The value of these secondary pur- ability to find similar studies that provide mean- chases made to restore inventory is estimated ingful comparisons of TMC’s economic impact at $1,581.2 million. with that of similar organizations. Second, the initial expenditures by TMC, The model identifies four groups of faculty, staff, students and visitors will generate spenders that together determine the institu- new income. Part of this spending is used to tion’s local economic impact: TMC and its affil- pay wages and salaries, make rent and interest iated members, which purchase equipment and payments, and pay proprietors and stockhold- supplies as corporate entities; faculty and staff, ers for their investment. Each round of the who spend part of their income in the im- business-to-business transactions described above pacted area; students, who spend locally; and generates income as well as additional final visitors, who do likewise. To define the area sales. As this extra income is earned, some is affected by this spending, we selected a region spent locally, inducing total additional expen- comprising 38 counties in southeast Texas, ditures of $1,607.5 million. with Harris County as an approximate center.5 Thus, after the initial direct expenditures We divide the expenditures of the four take place, secondary, tertiary and continued groups into two parts: those that occur within rounds of spending will more than double the the region and those that occur elsewhere. The effect. Each dollar spent directly generates sum of the expenditures within the Houston another 60 cents in final sales by local busi- region defines the direct economic impact of nesses, plus about 61 cents in sales induced by the institution. Table 1 summarizes the impact the expansion of regional income. of TMC on the Houston area in 2000. Direct These additional multiplier effects cannot local expenditures by the four groups totaled be measured directly, but instead are estimated $2,635.3 million.6 from an input–output model. The estimates This is only the first round of spending, shown here rely on the Bureau of Economic however. As these dollars are spent locally, we Analysis and their Regional Input–Output Mod- can trace two continuing impacts on local busi- eling System (RIMS II), a tool used widely to ness and local spending. First, as TMC (and its assess the economic impact of public and pri- employees, students and visitors) spends, more vate projects.7 RIMS II is also commonly used goods have to be ordered and produced to in economic impact studies of universities or 3 Table 2 cific amount to a certain year. An expenditure Construction Projects at Texas Medical Center of $300 million to $400 million in 2000 could (In Progress 2000–01) ultimately have generated an additional $800 Space Cost million in regional spending, 10,000 new jobs Sponsor and project (square feet) (millions) and $200 million in personal income in south- Baylor College of Medicine 70,000 $40 east Texas. In the comparisons below, however, Texas Heart Institute 327,000 $86 Texas Children’s Hospital 563,000 $154 we limit our focus to day-to-day operational 9 Texas Medical Center 908,000 $54 expenditures. UT–Houston Health Sciences Center 190,000 $57 M. D. Anderson Cancer Center 1,486,000 $540 SOME PERSPECTIVE ON TMC Total building 3,544,000 $931 ECONOMIC IMPACT Campus infrastructure $219 Comparisons with medical centers or other Total dollars $1,150 regional organizations can provide insight into SOURCE: Texas Medical Center. the role of the Texas Medical Center and the size of its economic influence in Houston. In this section, we compare TMC with another major medical centers such as this one, and the mul- element of Houston’s nonpetroleum economy, tipliers used here fall well within the range of the Johnson Space Center; with major regional similar studies. medical centers in Dallas and Galveston; and The RIMS II estimate of total personal income with two universities that are home to major generated by TMC through direct and indirect medical facilities: Emory University in Atlanta spending totals $3,861 million, about 2.2 per- and Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. cent of regional income generated in southeast Using impact studies for each of these institu- Texas in 2000. When the expenditure multiplier tions similar to the one presented above for TMC, is applied to employment, the secondary rounds we can draw some meaningful comparisons. of spending generate an additional 81,560 jobs. Johnson Space Center. The National Combined with the 61,041 employees who Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) work on campus, TMC accounted for 142,601 formed the Space Task Group in 1958 to man- jobs in 2000, or about 4.3 percent of total em- age Project Mercury and put man into space. ployment in the 38-county Houston region. In 1961, the task group was reformulated to handle all manned projects, and the Manned FURTHER IMPACT OF CONSTRUCTION Spacecraft Center was relocated about halfway Construction spending is yet another between Houston and Galveston. Renamed avenue for TMC to contribute to economic acti- the Johnson Space Center (JSC), it shares the vity in Houston, particularly over the past de- status of other key NASA facilities, such as the cade. Direct expenditures, analogous to those Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif.; for daily operations at TMC, are made by con- Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala.; tractors purchasing materials for TMC-related and Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, building activity and by construction workers Md. The role of these centers has shifted over spending wages within the region. time, but JSC remains responsible for planning, Table 2 lists TMC construction projects organizing and training for manned space flight. under way during 2000–01. Taken together, over The analogy to a college campus works 3.5 million square feet was planned or under well here, with a high proportion of JSC spend- construction, with a project value of $931 mil- ing tied to wages and salaries for highly skilled lion. Another $219 million was earmarked for personnel and local procurement largely tied construction of parking lots, garages, power to institutional expenditures for daily opera- facilities and other infrastructure.8 tions. Table 3 summarizes the impact of JSC Unfortunately, we are unable to estimate on southeast Texas. Local expenditures by NASA the dollar spending on each project during the employees and associated contractors10 are year 2000. If spread evenly over three or four $343.9 million, representing about 84 percent years, the construction expenditures might be of direct expenditures by TMC faculty and $300 million to $400 million, but because con- staff. Direct expenditures by TMC institutions, struction funds normally aren’t spent evenly however, are more than 10 times those of JSC, over time, we are reluctant to attribute any spe- and the much larger overall impact of TMC in 4 Table 3 medical institutions in close proximity, some Economic Impact of Johnson Space Center complementing each other and others actively (Year 2000 Operations) competing against each other, using free land Direct local expenditures within region Millions and other grants as the initial lure. Classic econo- JSC $190.0 mies of agglomeration reduce operating costs Employees and contractors $343.9 Other local $2.5 for TMC institutions and stimulate further growth. Total direct expenditures $536.4 Other Major University Medical Cen- ters. The comparisons in Table 5 take us away Secondary expenditures due to JSC Added regional production $332.5 from TMC’s concept of concentrating medical Income-induced spending $321.8 facilities on a single campus, but they provide Total regional expenditures $1,190.7 economic impacts on a scale more comparable with the $5.8 billion total expenditures gener- Direct and indirect personal income $2,203.3 ated by TMC. The two major universities stud- Employment (number of workers) ied—Emory and Johns Hopkins—have a major Direct 16,251 medical school on campus, along with associ- Indirect 11,538 Total 27,789 ated hospitals, clinics and laboratories. The

SOURCE: Center for Economic Development and Research, University of overall results include not only the entire uni- Houston–Clear Lake. versity, medical and nonmedical, but also affiliated health care facilities located throughout 2000 stems primarily from this large volume of the region. Emory operates hospitals and clin- regional purchases. After all the secondary ics across the Atlanta metropolitan area; the spending is accounted for, JSC showed less Johns Hopkins Health System does the same than $1.2 billion in total regional expenditures throughout the state of Maryland. in 2000 compared with TMC’s $5.8 billion. Sim- Emory University is the third largest ilarly, employment totals 27,789 for JSC versus employer in Atlanta, and the campus is home 142,601 for TMC, and the personal income dif- to well-known schools of law, business, public ference is $2.2 billion versus almost $3.9 billion. health and theology as well as a medical Regional Medical Centers. The tradi- school, clinics and an acute care teaching hos- tional regional medical center consists of hospital. A number of other hospitals and clinics in pitals, laboratories and other research facilities Atlanta also operate under Emory manage- built around a medical school. Two branches ment. The data in Table 5 include both the of the University of Texas—UT Southwestern medical and nonmedical parts of the univer- Medical Center at Dallas and the UT Medical sity, plus the off-campus medical operations. Branch at Galveston—provide examples. Table The direct spending impact is estimated at $1.3 4 summarizes the economic impact of these billion in 1999 for the Atlanta metropolitan area, two medical centers. The data reflect operation of the medical centers only, with no construc- Table 4 tion data. Total regional expenditure impact is Economic Impact of Two Regional Medical Centers nearly $1.3 billion for UT Southwestern and UT Southwestern UT Medical Branch $806.2 million for the Medical Branch at Galve- at Dallas at Galveston ston.11 Direct employment is substantially smaller Number of students 3,063 2,505 at UT Southwestern (5,146 versus 12,467 at Funded research $206 million $102.7 million Galveston) because Southwestern’s affiliated Patient visits hospitals are owned by other institutions; total Inpatient 75,000 32,505 employment impacts (11,969 for Dallas versus Outpatient 1.6 million 700,067 23,701 for Galveston) reflect this initial differ- Region affected North Texas Southeast Texas Year 1999 2000 ence in direct jobs.12 These regional medical centers are large Local expenditures Direct $406.1 million $366.4 million and impressive concentrations of talent and capi- Total $1,261.0 million $806.2 million tal. The major point here is that Houston’s TMC Employment impact is built on a different concept, and its success Direct 5,146 12,467 has placed it on a different plateau.13 As the Total 11,969 23,701 history and governance described earlier make SOURCES: “Economic Impact of UT Southwestern,” www.swmed.edu; Center for Economic Development and Research, University of Houston–Clear clear, the Houston institution clusters nonprofit Lake. 5 Table 5 Economic Impact of Two Universities and Their Medical Centers Johns Hopkins Institutions Emory University University Health System Combined Number of students 11,000 5,285 2,679 7,964 Funded research $217 million $1,023.9 million Patient visits Inpatient 42,000 — 72,500 — Outpatient 2.4 million — 1.6 million — Region affected Greater Atlanta Maryland Maryland Maryland Year 1999 1999 1999 1999 Local expenditures Direct $1.3 billion ——$3.0 billion Total $3.4 billion ——$6.4 billion Employment impact Direct 19,000 22,800 14,500 37,300 Total 45,447 59,490 37,833 97,323

SOURCES: “Economic Impact in Atlanta,” www.emory.edu; Bay Area Economics, Economic Impact of the Johns Hopkins Institutions in Maryland (December 1999).

and the total impact was $3.4 billion. Emory’s system, we would also expect close to 40 per- direct employment was 19,000. Total employ- cent of expenditures to come from health care. ment, including secondary impacts, was 45,447. When we compare these results with TMC, The Johns Hopkins data include both the we find TMC activities more heavily weighted university and the separately administered and toward patient care and education and less operated Johns Hopkins Health System, which toward research. This is appropriate, given the shares close ties to the university. Together they medical focus of TMC activities. But in Johns make up the largest employer in Maryland. The Hopkins’ combination of major university, re- health care system includes the medical school, knowned research institution and statewide three acute care hospitals, geriatric and home health care provider, we have found regional care centers, and a number of outpatient clin- economic impacts on a scale comparable with ics throughout the state. About 40 percent of those of TMC in Houston. the health system’s expenditures are in Balti- more, 25 percent in the rest of Baltimore County CONCLUSIONS and 35 percent scattered within Maryland. The economic impact of the Texas Medical Johns Hopkins University had a budget of Center’s operations is large. It accounts for $1.8 billion in 1999, supporting schools of arts nearly $6 billion in regional spending, $3.9 bil- and sciences, engineering, nursing, public health, lion in regional personal income and over international studies, business and education. 140,000 jobs. TMC’s impact is felt primarily The largest recipient of federal research funds through its regional purchases of goods and among U.S. universities, it received over $1 bil- services—over $2 billion in 2000. In contrast, lion in research funding, including $306.9 mil- while Johnson Space Center has nearly as big lion for medical research, from all sources in an impact as TMC in terms of local spending 1999. Research grants support over 58 percent by its employees, its overall impact ($1.2 bil- of the university’s budget. lion in spending) is dwarfed by TMC because The table divides data between the univer- JSC’s institutional purchases are only one-tenth sity and the health system where possible. of those made by TMC. 1999 total direct expenditures by the combined TMC is large compared with the typical Johns Hopkins institutions were $3 billion, and university-affiliated medical center, a result of the direct and indirect spending was $6.4 bil- its unique concept. TMC is a collection of non- lion.14 The combined direct employment was profit organizations brought together by the 37,300, and the total employment impact was incentive of free land, some competing and 97,323. Of the total employment impact, about others complementing each other, but all ben- 39 percent comes from the health system. efiting from internal cost economies generated Although data were not available to divide ex- by the campus’s size. To find a comparable penditures between the university and the health organization that provides such large-scale 6 economic impacts to a region, we had to range ton at Clear Lake. The Center for Economic Development far afield. Emory University and Johns Hopkins and Research has extensive experience with these impact studies, and we rely on their results for comparisons University, when combined with their affiliated made later in this report. A typical Caffrey and Isaacs regional health care systems, provide such study uses survey work to determine student and visitor comparisons. spending. We combined basic data from TMC on number of students and their places of residence and on the Finally, we have to note that economic number of visitors with rules of thumb on expenditures impacts are a narrow window on the benefits from the Clear Lake center’s experience in past studies. 7 the Texas Medical Center offers Houston. TMC U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Regional Multipliers: A User Handbook for the brings to the city some of the world’s finest Regional Input–Output Modeling System (RIMS II), 3rd medical talent. It draws foreign patients— ed. (March 1997). 8 nearly 20,000 in 2000. The center’s research These expenditures are independent of any renovation or repairs in the wake of Tropical Storm Allison. has given Houston a well-defined pathway into 9 In the comparisons below, no construction expenditure biotechnology and other high-tech industries, data were available for the UT Medical Branch study. The as the city seeks to diversify its economic base UT Southwestern Medical Center study mentioned FY 1999 expenditures of $34 million and a five-year plan away from oil. TMC provides tens of millions calling for $392 million in new construction. Emory’s of dollars in pro bono health care to the com- five-year plan includes $613 million in new construction. munity. TMC employees serve the community Johns Hopkins estimated $172 million in 1999 expenditures, and its health system plans $882 million in con- as sports coaches, Scout leaders and civic vol- struction spending over the next five years. unteers. 10 About half the direct employment counted here is per- There is little doubt that Monroe Dunaway formed under contract to JSC by workers in the Hous- ton–Clear Lake area. Among the recognizable company Anderson would be extraordinarily pleased names are Boeing Co., Lockheed Martin Corp., Raytheon with the fruits of his legacy to the Houston Co. and United Technologies Corp. 11 community. The spending and employment impacts reported in the table are lower than those reported by the UT South- —Robert W. Gilmer western study. The study assumed that the $206 million Robert F. Hodgin in research expenditures generated $618 million in additional spending and 8,600 jobs apart from the usual insti- Mary Schiflett tutional, employee, student and visitor impacts. We removed these figures to make the results comparable Hodgin is executive director of the Office of with the other studies reported here. 12 The differences are also reflected in direct expenditures Research Administration, University of Houston by the two institutions—$98 million for UT Southwest- at Clear Lake. Schiflett is vice president of the ern versus $249.8 million for UT Medical Branch. Texas Medical Center. 13 It should be noted that TMC contains two medical schools that, if combined, would provide services roughly the same size as the two combined institutions NOTES in Table 4. Baylor College of Medicine has 2,379 students 1 For a complete history, see N. Don Macon, Monroe Dun- and residents, performs $310 million in funded research, away Anderson: His Legacy, A History of the Texas Med- and has 131,000 inpatient and 2 million outpatient visits ical Center (Houston: Texas Medical Center, 1994). per year. The University of Texas Health Science Center 2 The six general hospitals are Methodist Diagnostic Hos- at Houston Medical School has 1,568 students and resi- pital, Ben Taub General Hospital, Memorial Hermann dents, performs $77.8 million in research, and has Hospital (including Memorial Hermann Children’s Hospi- 263,000 inpatient and 969,000 outpatient visits. The med- tal within its buildings), Lyndon B. Johnson General Hos- ical school, however, is only one arm of the UT Health pital, The Methodist Hospital and St. Luke’s Episcopal Science Center at Houston; its dental branch, Graduate Hospital. The seven specialized hospitals are The Insti- School of Biomedical Sciences, School of Health Infor- tute for Rehabilitation and Research (TIRR), Shriners Hos- mation Sciences, School of Nursing and School of Public pitals for Children–Houston, Texas Children’s Hospital, Health are all located in TMC. The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, 14 The other assessments of regional economic impact Harris County Psychiatric Center, Veterans Affairs Medical reported in this article look at an existing institution and Center in Houston and Quentin Mease Community Hos- its impact on a specific region. The Johns Hopkins report pital. The other patient care facilities are The Hospice addressed the impact on Maryland of the university’s and the Texas Heart Institute. health system, assuming other hospitals would have 3 Most of these data come from Texas Medical Center: sprung up if Johns Hopkins did not exist; thus, the report Facts and Figures 2001 or Brief Descriptions of Member assesses mostly health care impacts on out-of-state and Institutions: 2001, published by TMC Public Affairs foreign patients. This perspective is interesting for assess- Office. ing the value of a proposed project that would displace 4 John Caffrey and Herbert H. Isaacs, Estimating the existing institutions, but it is not the same question asked Impact of a College or University on the Local Community by other studies. To bring the Johns Hopkins study into (Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1971). line with other reports, we assumed that the proportion 5 This is economic area 131 as defined by the Bureau of of health care system expenditures within the state was Economic Analysis in its regional modeling work. the same as that of the university. This switch in the 6 These spending estimates were developed by the Texas report’s focus increased the health system’s direct spend- Medical Center in conjunction with the Center for Eco- ing by $700 million and added 24,000 new jobs to the nomic Development and Research, University of Hous- total employment impact. 7 HOUSTON BEIGE BOOK OCTOBER 2001 enter 2002. with poorprospectsforjobgrowthaswe Houston withvirtuallynomomentumand declines inoilandgasdrillingcouldleave oftheU.S.economyandcontinued formance Houston businesscycle.Continuedpoorper- economy that thefundamentals and tonormal nomic activitywasreturning there weremanyindicationsthatlocaleco- ground toahalt.ByearlyOctober, however, the pressastravelandconsumerspending economic resultswerelargely playedoutin the wakeofterroristattack,important the worldasSept.11tragedyunfolded.In winter. Gasolinepriceshave droppedmore ofaheatingoilshortagethis eased concerns $30 beforetheattack. settled inarangeof$21 The priceofWest Texas hassince Intermediate consumption pushedcrudepricesdownward. fears ofglobalrecessionandreducedjetfuel no majoroil-producingnationwasinvolved, prices. Aftertheattack,onceitbecameclear refinery outagesweresupportinggasoline its thirdproductioncutoftheyear, and major before Sept.11.OPEChadjustimplemented OIL ANDNATURAL GAS cost financing,rebatesandotherincentives. with consumersrespondingstronglytolow- early resultsforOctoberlookedquitepositive, tember salesdownby13percent.Butthe meet orexceedlastOctober businesshadsnappedbackto reported ers were surprisinglypositive.Anumberofretail- television. However, earlyOctoberresults several daysathome,apparentlygluedtothe spent sales inSeptember;Houstonconsumers RETAILING ANDAUTOS H Reduced jetfuelconsumptionhasalso Oil andoilproductpriceswerebullish The storywassimilarforautos,withSep- Retailers acrosstheboardreportedpoor For more information, contactBillGilmerat(713)652-1546or [email protected] moreinformation, ouston pausedalongwiththerestof The views expressedare thoseofthe authorsanddo notnecessarily reflectthepositions — were onceagaindrivingthe For acopyofthispublication, writetoBillGilmer, HoustonBranch, Federal Reserve BankofDallas,P.O. Box2578,Houston, TX77252. This publication is available on the Internet atwww.dallasfed.org.This publication isavailableontheInternet of theFederal Reserve BankofDallas ortheFederal ReserveSystem. — oil andgas,thenational – $22, downfromnear ’ s. 800 dents wereforecastingacountofonly land rigsfordeepgasdrilling.Somerespon- rates continuetodecline,particularlylarge rig countfallingbyover100insixweeks.Day cline hasbeenamajorfactorinthedomestic has sincerecoveredtonear$2.50,butthede- as oilpricescollapsed.Thenaturalgasprice briefly fellunder$2perthousandcubicfeet by thesummerbuildupingasinventories, crude, butmargins arenowweakeningrapidly. strong asproductpriceslaggedthefallin last fewweeks,refinermargins stayedfairly continued refineryoutages.Formostofthe slowly thancrudeprices,partlybecauseof tain environment. dramatic uptickindepositsduetotheuncer- interest ratesandsmallerinstitutionsseeinga tions reportingalossofdepositsduetofalling growth reportsaremixed,withlarger institu- could notkeepupwithloandemand.Deposit months ago,whendepositoryinstitutions from12 with cash.Thisisaturnaround sharply, leavingfinancialinstitutionsflush haveaccelerated categories. Loanpayoffs FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS Plastic resinpricesarestableordeclining. is holdingontoimprovedprofitmargins. one plastics customersorproducers,andno cost issimplybeingpassedontodownstream pacity comesonlinein2001.Fallingfeedstock tinues togrowasarecordamountofnewca- notch. However, theglobalcapacityglutcon- demand, wasreportedtohavemovedupa ducers, anddemand,particularlyinternational reduced operatingcostsforpetrochemicalpro- PETROCHEMICALS momentum. rapidly losingitsonlyremainingsourceof drilling slowsdown,theHoustoneconomyis – Natural gasprices,alreadydraggeddown Loan demandcontinuestoweakeninall Declining naturalgaspricessharply 900 workingrigsbyearlynextyear. As