Stimulus Bad For States

  Like  Delaware  many states were facing deficits for the coming fiscal year. But thanks to the Federal Stimulus package that Pres. Obama pushed through congress , many of those states were able to use that money to fill the gaps.

   Now you may ask why is that a bad thing? Well because the stimulus was a one time payment (we hope).  So now that the states have made it through another fiscal cycle without being forced to make the cuts that were needed, what will they do next year?

   Well a conservative mind like mine will hope that they will realize the mistake they have made and make the cuts that are needed. Though the cuts may need to be even deeper do to the fact that the states will likely have implemented new programs with the stimulus money that they can’t pay for due to lower revenue because of higher federal taxes.

   Unfortunately there is the very real chance that state legislatures will become addicted to the lure of federal dollars. Much as here in Delaware our legislators became addicted to the transfer tax and the money from gambling and spent it as if it would never run out.

  There are two things to remember about states taking federal money to run their state on. One is that no federal dollar comes without a string attached. When we take these federal dollars we allow the federal government more control over what should be states rights. Second , for every federal dollar that comes into the state there is a good chance that ten went out to be spent around the country.

  The state needs to cut the ties with the federal government as much as possible and return to only those which the constitution spells out. The federal government has been able over the years to worm its way into state affairs due to the greed of state legislatures who are willing to make a deal with the federal devil.

  A third possibility is that we see sweeping change in the federal government because of the election of 2010 and the federal funding will dry up. And again due to weak state legislatures and legislators , the states will raise state taxes to make up the short fall of loosing the federal stimulus money.

  No matter how this shakes out we as citizens are in for several years at least of uncertainty and higher taxes, and at worst we will see a continuation of the current policies which are intended to increase and consolidate federal control and power over the states.

  We need state legislators who have the courage and the vision to say no to the federal dollar and to make the hard choices in the short term for the good of the state and its citizens in the long term.


3 Responses to “Stimulus Bad For States”

  1. Ed Heath Says:

    Where are we going to find these common sense, fiscally responsible individuals? (“We need state legislators who have the courage and the vision to say no to the federal dollar and to make the hard choices in the short term for the good of the state and its citizens in the long term.”)

    I’m with you 100%, so lets hope a shining star emerges for the 2010 U.S. Senate election, no matter what party they run under!

  2. frankknotts Says:

    Ed, I know it is easier to say we need them then it is to find them. But out of fustration may come the people who have sat back and waited for someone else to solve the problems. There are many reasons why it is hard to find good people.
    You have the cost of just putting together a group to decide whether you should run or not. Then you have the trouble of party politics , you know who’s turn is it to run ? You have the politics of destruction, you know , where they dig up the fact that you couldn’t color inside the lines until you were five.
    But all of that being said we are seeing some good people taking the leap and also some taking a good hard look over the edge.
    Just look at the 19th Senatorial special election. While you have Rep. Joe Booth who could be said to be a part of the current problems since he is currently in government, I would say that he is a fair conservative. But you also have a Matt Opaliski running. Matt is a working class guy who is conservative and knows the ends and outs. I would say that he shows the potential of being one of those people with the courage and vision. I do wish he could have run on the GOP ticket so as not to split votes but that doesn’t lesson his ability.
    Also I don’t think it is a huge secret that Shawn Fink is seriously considering a run at John Atkins for the 41st Representative District. Shawn is another person with good conservative credentials who has spoken out against big government. Though he did make a statement about using the stimulus money since it was there anyway, that gave me pause.
    As for the U. S. Senate race in 2010 ? Well I am hoping that Christine O’Donnell will try one more time, though I must say that if she does and is unsuccessful then she needs to back up and try for some other office.
    The problem for her is that GOP so called heavy weight Mike Castle may decide he wants it and in that case Ms. O’Donnell won’t get the GOP backing unless she challenges him in a primary, which she can win since he would be deprived of his base, Democratic voters.

  3. Ed Heath Says:

    I know we are finnally getting some good people to step up to the plate and try. Kudos to them! I’ll be at the debate tonight to hear Matt speak, who I think is one of those people, and I agree about the splintered vote being a shame. However, After 37 years, I’m not blindly pulling the Republican party lever anymore, I’m pulling the lever for the person with the most common sense and closest to my new Modern Whig philosophy.

    Castle won’t ever get my vote (at least in the primary)! However, I probably shouldn’t say that depending on his opposition if he makes it to the Senate election. I hear an Independent may arise worth looking at for the Senate seat (Jim Egnor).

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: