Givers and Takers: GOP Buys Votes with Dem Money

[BurtWorm]

Dems have sat on their thumbs allowing Republicans to shift federal dollars to Red States, essentially creating a new form of welfare. The Republibots are living off the sweat of the Demosaps.



http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/30/opinion/30PINK.html?pagewanted=print&position=

January 30, 2004
OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
Givers and Takers
By DANIEL H. PINK

WASHINGTON

...

Each year, the Tax Foundation, a nonprofit research group, crunches numbers from the Census Bureau to produce an intriguing figure: how much each state receives in federal spending for every dollar it pays in federal taxes.

For example, according to the most recent data, for every dollar the average North Dakotan paid in federal taxes, he received $2.07 in federal benefits. But while someone in Fargo was doubling his money, his counterpart in neighboring Minnesota was being shortchanged. For every dollar Minnesotans sent to Washington, only 77 cents in federal spending flowed back to the state.

Using the Tax Foundation's analysis, it's possible to group the 50 states into two categories: Givers and Takers. Giver states get back less than a dollar in spending for every dollar they contribute to federal coffers. Taker states pocket more than a dollar for every tax dollar they send to Washington. Thirty-three states are Takers; 16 are Givers. (One state, Indiana, has a perfect one-to-one ratio of taxes paid and spending received. As seat of the federal government, the District of Columbia has no choice but to be a Taker, and is therefore not comparable to the 50 states in this regard.)

The Democrats' electability predicament comes into focus when you compare the map of Giver and Taker states with the well-worn electoral map of red (Republican) and blue (Democrat) states. You might expect that in the 2000 presidential election, Republicans, the party of low taxes and limited government, would have carried the Giver states — while Democrats, the party of wild spending and wooly bureaucracy, would have appealed to the Taker states. But it was the reverse. George W. Bush was the candidate of the Taker states. Al Gore was the candidate of the Giver states.

...


Daniel H. Pink, the author of "Free Agent Nation," was the chief speechwriter for Vice President Al Gore from 1995 to 1997

[jonoboy]

1. yeh this topsy turvy world is really getting out of hand

[StClone]

2. This is bad for another reason

It makes the Blue states look like losers though each Taker state some how believes it isn't welfare but good governing by their Reps. It's WELFARE in BLUE!

[BurtWorm]

3. Exactly.

Try to sell Blue State voters on the idea of equity in this issue. "We're going to take back what we gave you for the sake of fairness. Vote for us!"

[BurtWorm]

4. kick

:kick:

[HootieMcBoob]

5. yup

:kick: