I live in a state, only one of four, which actually has a budget surplus. Even during Clinton's long run as governor, maintaining a healthy budget was a top priority and the citizens of the state support this.
The tradeoff perhaps is that we don't have as many of the bells and whistles we might have if we operated in a more cavalier manner relative to those states of similar population and other demographics. Our road and school systems are rudimentary for the most part. Just enough to get the job done. Fewer of our public employees are in unions. As a group, their wages, benefits, and pensions are closer to the levels of the private sector in the state. A little better, but not enormously. The main reason we get back more federal dollars than we send in is because Arkansas maintains two military bases....or so I've read this being the explanation.
So, I confess, I will be extremely ticked off if massive bailouts are given to the states you mention or to any other profligate state. It's not like these states' problems happened overnight. They were a long time in coming and easy to discern.
When the overall pie stops growing and starts looking as though it might even shrink, it serves to dampen any tendencies to be generous of spirit and cut some slack to those people, institutions, and governments that failed to manage their own finances. I can envision all kinds of new dimensions to the old warfares between haves and have nots, or maybe better described as the dids and did nots. |
