It’s those fine red states that vote Republican because they embrace the values of self-reliance and limited government, right? That may be the rhetoric, but it sure isn’t the reality.
In his inaugural address tomorrow, I’m guessing, George W. Bush will take a moment to reaffirm the “red state” values that returned him and the Republican congressional majority to power. You know, things like self-reliance, free markets, small government and fiscal rectitude.
Funny, that. I have in front of me the latest report from the Tax Foundation showing how much each state gets back in contracts, benefits and subsidies for every dollar of taxes paid. And it shows that, with a few exceptions, the anti-government red states are the net winners in the flow of funds while the pro-government blue states are almost all losers.
Among the biggest winners in 2003, for example, were New Mexico, at $1.99 for every tax dollar paid, followed closely by Alaska, Mississippi, North and South Dakota, Alabama and Montana — the “red-ink states,” as Ken Cook of the Environmental Working Group calls them. The biggest loser was New Jersey, at 57 cents per dollar paid, followed by blue states Connecticut, New York, California, Massachusetts and Illinois.
As Washington Post’s Steven Pearlstein put it, “We now have a new red-state political majority comprising voters who, while professing distrust of government and disdain for the values of the blue-state minority, are only too happy to rely on Washington and blue-state wealth to keep them in the style to which they have become accustomed.”
It’s not only rank hypocrisy; it’s a problem that’s getting worse.
For years, the conservative states dominated by voters who claim to love limited government and hate federal spending have enjoyed the fruits of the blue states’ labor. But as Republicans have grown more dominant in recent election cycles, so too has the trend of giving more federal funds to the states that claim not to want it.
For all the conservative whining about redistribution of wealth in this country, it seems we have plenty of it — from the bottom up in terms of income, and from top down in terms of geography.