Posted on 11/14/2004 8:17:20 PM PST by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON (AP) - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger campaigned on a promise to get so much federal money for California he'd be known as the Collectinator. He pledged to secure more than $50 billion to correct California's "donor state" status that has residents paying more in federal taxes than they get in federal programs.
A year later, Schwarzenegger hasn't delivered on the most extravagant of his campaign trail promises - most likely no governor could. The federal treasury remains in debt to California, and the $50 billion Schwarzenegger promised is nowhere in sight.
But while Democrats say Schwarzenegger should have done more, the governor can boast of scooping up more than $1 billion in new federal funding and penalties waived - including some money that his Democratic predecessor Gray Davis tried but failed to obtain.
The money Schwarzenegger has helped get far exceeds the projection in his January budget, which assumed just $350 million in new federal money for the 2004-05 budget year.
"Having Gov. Schwarzenegger's name on a letter truly makes a difference, I've seen it, I've been here," said Stacy Carlson, director of the governor's Washington office. "It's Gov. Schwarzenegger as well as California. It's a big footprint."
Schwarzenegger has pushed for California's funding priorities in letters to the Bush administration, some jointly signed with other governors, as well as private meetings with lawmakers and administration officials including Vice President Dick Cheney and Education Secretary Rod Paige. In February he visited Washington, his one trip as governor, and met with Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson, among others.
Schwarzenegger's relationship with Thompson has proved particularly fruitful. Programs administered by the Health and Human Services Department account for a big chunk of the $1.2 billion Schwarzenegger brought back to Sacramento.
HHS approved Medicaid coverage worth $340 million a year for elderly and disabled people who receive in-home care, and allowed California to push back for at least one year a $220 million penalty due because of how the state keeps track of child support payments.
The department also is restoring $88 million for California's child welfare services case management system, money the state was set to lose because of administrative problems, and $30 million for a regional development center in South Los Angeles.
Some of the penalty waivers were successes the Davis administration couldn't pull off.
"It certainly can't hurt to have a friendly face or someone of like mind on the signature line when asking for a special favor to avoid a penalty or have funding reinstated," said Tim Ransdell, director of the California Institute for Federal Policy Research.
But some Democrats said that getting penalties waived is easy work compared with actually altering funding formulas that disadvantage California. For example, Homeland Security funds are distributed in a way that leaves big cities in California and elsewhere complaining they're underfunded, and states pick up much of the tab for incarcerating illegal aliens who commit crimes - a cost that disproportionately affects California.
"The big-dollar items have to do with formulas where we're disadvantaged," said Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, chairwoman of the Democrats in the state's congressional delegation.
Schwarzenegger's pursuit of federal funds "falls far short of the promise," she said. "I didn't coin the phrase the Collectinator, he did. And if you take a look at how California's losing, it's losing in many significant ways."
California's Democratic House members gave Schwarzenegger a list a year ago of $20 billion in federal funds they wanted him to pursue, including more money for Head Start and No Child Left Behind. Lofgren contended that Schwarzenegger didn't follow up on their suggestions.
Schwarzenegger Finance Department spokesman H.D. Palmer disputed the criticism.
"We came in and our immediate goal was to do what was doable in this past year and do it quickly, and we've got a pretty good track record in achieving it. That doesn't mean we're done," Palmer said. "In terms of changing those formulas in that environment, that takes more time," he said, noting that states are fighting each other for funding in face of a federal budget deficit.
In 2003, California got back 78 cents in goods and services for every $1 it sent to the federal government in taxes, according to the Washington-based Tax Foundation. The deficit is partly because California's residents are younger than the national average, so less Social Security and Medicare funds go to the state. Residents are also slightly richer than the national average, increasing the state's tax payments.
On the campaign trail Schwarzenegger railed against the inequity.
"We want to get more of that money back. There is billions of dollars, more than $50 billion they are not giving us, so I will collect that," he said during a debate in September 2003. "That's why I said many times, when I am through with my term as governor, I will be known not only as the Terminator but as the Collectinator."
The other new pieces of federal funding cited by the Schwarzenegger administration are:
-$175 million from penalties waived by the Department of Agriculture for error rates in distributing food stamps;
-$250 million in transportation funding after Schwarzenegger and other big-state governors lobbied Congress to include extension of a "minimum guarantee" of return on gas tax money when highway funding was extended in September;
-$75 million from the Education Department for charter schools;
-$12 million from the Agriculture Department to fight Sudden Oak Death and Pierce's disease, which kills grapevines.
A GOP Congress and a just re-elected Republican President didn't need California's help and they're not going to do a Democratic state any special favors. Any money that's left is going to go to rewarding the heartland. Its called helping your friends and punishing your enemies. DUH.
>> "We want to get more of that money back...."
I have to wonder why so much of the money is gleefully sent to Washington in the first place. If each state were to receive its "equitable" share back, they couldn't expect to receive even 75 cents on the dollar. Every dollar that goes to Washington gets handling costs stripped out of it before anything else happens to it -- the agency receiving the funds has to pay some clerks to open the mail, just for starters. Then there's the office rent, the office furnishings, office supplies, staff, and etc. -- and we haven't even mentioned the government program yet that this is supposed to fund. It is only the fractional remainder of each of those dollars that is then available for redistribution back to the states. Think how much highway could be built with the dollars that go to fund just the federal highway administration.
>>...allowed California to push back for at least one year a $220 million penalty due because of how the state keeps track of child support payments.
So, the state was penalized $220 million for not doing the job right. Now, California gets to delay payment of that penalty (deferring yet more state expenses into the future), and this is considered as getting more federal money???
Man-oh-man, and they said "new math" was convoluted!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.