Unfortunately, the notion that red states subsidize blue states doesn't stand up to analysis.
On average, blue states pay in more than they get back, red states the reverse.
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/politics/why-do-red-states-want-limited-gov-spending-then-take-more#
This article has a nice graphic that illustrates which states rely on Federal money:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/08/americas-fiscal-union
Quite a few conservatives seem to believe that the bulk of Federal interstate money transfers take place in the form of welfare payments and aid to cities but they miss the federal money spend on things like farm subsidies, dams, and rural infrastructure as well as the welfare and aid to the poor that goes to rural areas because it’s not as concentrated or easy to see. Also, all those retirees who retire in the south and west and all of those military bases in blue states are supported by a lot of Federal spending, too. A lot of that makes sense, because it’s cheaper to live and operate a military base in those places than the Northeast, Upper Midwest, or California, and a lot of it is simply because the people are richer and have more money in blue states and tax rate takes more of their money. But it also means more money is flowing from blue states to red states than the other way around and fantasies about how much better the red states would financially do without the blue states are fantasies.