View stories by State
HOME RSS FEEDS ARCHIVES ABOUT US SITE MAP PUBLICATIONS
Search using      Advanced
Saturday, November 21, 2009
or Browse All States
CRIME & COURTS
ECONOMY & BUSINESS
EDUCATION
ELECTIONS
ENERGY
ENVIRONMENT
GOVS' SPEECHES
HEALTH CARE
HOMELAND SECURITY
POLITICS
RECESSION & RECOVERY
SOCIAL POLICY
TAXES & BUDGET
TECHNOLOGY
TRANSPORTATION
ARCHIVES
COMMENTARY
PUBLICATIONS
RSS FEEDS
STATE SPEECHES
NEWS ALERTS
PUBLIC POLICY LINKS
TOOLBARS
STATE BLOGS
ISSUE BLOGS


Register to comment on Stateline.org Stories

Thursday, December 12, 2002

Fed Aid To States Unlikely, Experts Say

Comments Write the editor Print this story

State lawmakers looking for significant financial help from the federal government this year are facing major hurdles, a panel of political and budget experts said Thursday (12/12).

The culprit is a significant federal budget deficit, perhaps as high as $200 billion, stemming from the recession, mounting costs linked to the anti-terrorism efforts and the Bush tax cut.

"Between those two projects. . .it is very clear that domestic discretionary spending is going to be squeezed and squeezed seriously," said Washington Post columnist David Broder, the panel's moderator, at the annual National Conference of State Legislature's Fall Forum in Washington, DC.

States are seeking help from the federal government to deal with aggregate budget deficits that could top $60 billion this year.

The recent election, in which Republicans took back the U.S. Senate and added to their majority in the U.S. House, complicates state fiscal relief efforts, Broder said.

"Republicans on Capitol Hill feel almost as confident now as when they shook Democrats in 1994, and they can now proceed with their long-term project of reducing the scale of the federal government on the domestic side," he said.

This means that major state priorities, such as an increase in the federal government's share of total Medicaid spending and more federal dollars for major transportation projects, student testing and election reform, could lose out to the concerns of fiscal conservatives.

That may be the case, countered a senior Republican Senate staffer, but the political situation on Capitol Hill is murkier than it may appear from the election results.

"Given the current situation of the majority leader for the U.S. Senate, I think some of his leverage is going to be weakened," said Bill Hoagland, staff director for the Senate Budget Committee.

Hoagland referred to the firestorm that followed Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott's (R-Miss.) recent comments supporting Sen. Strom Thurmond's (R-S.C.) failed 1948 presidential campaign, in which he ran as a segregationist.

Hoagland said another factor that could persuade conservatives to loosen their purse strings is the narrow majority Senate Republicans will face come January. They will hold just a 51-49 majority.

This may force Republicans to push a relatively moderate fiscal agenda for fear of losing a centrist member or two to the Democrats, he said.

Republicans lost their majority in May 2001 in just that manner when Sen. Jim Jeffords (I-Vermont) left the Republican Party to become an independent, partly over differences with conservatives on education funding.

Lott is unlikely to court such a scenario again, said Hoagland. As a result, the fiscal concerns of state lawmakers, which tend to be bipartisan concerns, will have traction on Capitol Hill, he asserted.

Hoagland noted a few areas of likely action when Congress convenes in January:
  • an extension of unemployment benefits,
  • full funding of the $3.5 billion in anti-terror money promised to first-responders,
  • partial funding of election reform efforts
  • continued funding of transportation programs at current levels, despite a scheduled drop due to lower gas tax receipts.

    But more direct and substantial fiscal relief for states seems unlikely. Hoagland was not optimistic about proposals to increase the federal government's spending on Medicaid and he made no mention of other fiscal relief proposals, such as revenue sharing or large block grants.

    Utah's Speaker of the House Marty Stephens (R), may have been speaking for generations of frustrated state lawmakers when he said states should not be subject to federally mandated programs.

    "Simply fund the mandate," said Stephens. "If [the federal government] doesn't have the money to fund these mandates, stop passing the program."

    Contact Jason White at jwhite@stateline.org


  • Comment on this story in the space below by registering with Stateline.org.

    Issues: Politics   

    COMMENTS (0)
    There are no comments yet, would you like to add one?
    Recession and Recovery
    Read the latest news, analysis and research on the economic crisis in the states in Stateline.org's new Recession and Recovery special section.
    The Stimulus and the StatesThe Stimulus and the
    States

    Follow how states are managing the stimulus money and which programs are receiving funding as part of the recovery effort using Stateline.org's stimulus special section.
    Stateline Blogs
    Stateline.org has compiled an extensive list of state issue political blogs to make it convenient for you to follow state government.

    If a blog you find interesting and informative is not on our list, tell us about it by sending an email to editor@stateline.org.
    Blogs organized by Issue
    lineBlogs organized by State
    State Public Policy Resources
    Stateline.org has put together a list of state public policy resources organized by issue. Here, you will find useful links to essential information from government, academia, and think tanks. If you have a link to add, please email us.


    The Pew Charitable Trusts applies the power of knowledge to solve today’s most challenging problems. Pew's Center on the States identifies and advances state policy solutions.