Only 11 states depended on the federal government for more than one-third of their total revenues in 2001. By 2012, 24 states found themselves in this situation.
State-by-state data from the U.S. Census Bureau, compiled by the State Budget Solutions nonprofit, illustrates the trend of increasing state dependence on federal financial assistance.
Forty-one of the 50 states have become more dependent on the federal government since 2001 — with federal dollars accounting for an increasing share of their total revenues.
This trend of increased state dependency on Washington reduces state and local control, while threatening the states' long-run autonomy.
The reason is that with federal patronage comes federal leverage. The original Obamacare plan, for example, was to force states to expand Medicaid by threatening them with loss of all federal matching Medicaid funds if they refused.
Although that particular scheme was struck down by the Supreme Court, state governments hate to turn down revenue, and federal dollars have strings attached that force states either to operate as Washington prefers or lose the money.
This problem is exacerbated by the federal government's control of the currency and ability to borrow virtually unlimited amounts of money.
No state can print money, and most states must balance their annual or biennial budgets. States that depend on federal funds are also vulnerable when Washington cuts programs.
Below is a look at the five states whose financial dependency on Washington grew the most between 2001 and 2012.
Keep in mind that this is not merely a measure of federal dollars spent in any particular state, but rather a look at the share of federal money making up a state's overall budget, and how fast that share has grown since 2001.
The federal money that goes to states -- known officially as "intra-governmental revenue" -- includes everything from one-time stimulus and disaster grants to highway funds and federal contributions to state-run welfare programs.
Also note that some states with lower taxes and smaller governments will appear to be more dependent because federally funded programs necessarily comprise bigger portions of their budgets.
5. Idaho (29 percent more dependent since 2001): The Gem State still receives less from the feds per resident than the average state government ($1,582). It also has hundreds of miles of highways despite its small population.
(Click link below to read more)
Sphere: Related Content
- Judy Chaffee
- This site is the inspiration of a former reporter/photographer for one of New England's largest daily newspapers and for various magazines. The intent is to direct readers to interesting political articles, and we urge you to visit the source sites. Any comments may be noted on site or directed to KarisChaf at gmail.