Democratic Districts Won Twice as Much Stimulus as GOP Districts, Study Shows

[KRonn]

Well, I'm shocked, just shocked, I tell you!1!      Lol.. big surprise!

But hey, no worry, I'm sure the Repubs get their turns to do similar things too!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/18/democratic-districts-won-twice-stimulus-gop-districts-study-shows/

Democratic Districts Won Twice as Much Stimulus as GOP Districts, Study Shows



Democratic districts have received nearly twice as much stimulus money as Republican districts and the cash has been awarded without regard to how badly an area was suffering from job losses, according to a new study.

The Mercatus Center at George Mason University reviewed the distribution of $157 billion in stimulus dollars based on publicly available reports and found that there was "no statistical correlation" between the amount of money a district got and its income or unemployment rate.

Rather, the study found that Democratic congressional districts received 1.89 times more money than GOP districts. The average award for Democratic districts was $439 million, while the average award for Republican ones was $232 million.

On average, Democratic districts also got 152 awards, while Republican ones got 94.

The data is sure to fuel skepticism about the $787 billion stimulus bill passed in February that only garnered three Republican votes. While the administration claims it has created 640,000 jobs, critics point to the still-soaring 10 percent unemployment rate in arguing that the stimulus has had a nominal effect.

Oddly, the Mercatus study found far more stimulus money went to higher-income areas than lower-income areas.

"We found no correlation between economic indicators and stimulus funding. Preliminary results find no effect of unemployment, median income, or mean income on stimulus funds allocation," the report said.

[MadImmortalMan]

200-400 million is a lot of money for a single congressional district. That really puts in perspective how big the stimulus was. Wow.

[KRonn]

200-400 million is a lot of money for a single congressional district. That really puts in perspective how big the stimulus was. Wow.

I live in the People's Republic of Massachusetts! We must have made out like bandits with cash flowing in!!!!     

[Sheilbh]

200-400 million is a lot of money for a single congressional district. That really puts in perspective how big the stimulus was. Wow.

But most of the stimulus was tax cuts and funds for the states (for things like unemployment, paying public sector workers and so on) so it seems difficult to measure how much each district got unless this refers to just the bits that were about building stuff.

[Tonitrus]

Being that, most likely, the heavily urban, poor, and run-down neighborhoods are predominantly Democrat...this doesn't shock or alarm me in the slightest.

[Vince]

Well those red districts, states and protesters claimed they didn't want the money...

[Razgovory]

Well those red districts, states and protesters claimed they didn't want the money...

This actually happened.

[KRonn]

Well those red districts, states and protesters claimed they didn't want the money...

This actually happened.

True. One reason was along the lines that when the Federal money ran out the state would have to pay a lot of extra money to keep funding up for programs, or end funding which isn't usually so popular to do. Or some felt the money was too much and going to the wrong things.

[Admiral Yi]

It does smell fishy.

One thing in the link that doesn't make sense is they claim no corelatiion with income and then say higher income district got more.

[alfred russel]

Being that, most likely, the heavily urban, poor, and run-down neighborhoods are predominantly Democrat...this doesn't shock or alarm me in the slightest.

Aside from valid reasons like this one that there could be a disparity, is anyone surprised by this? Democrats funnel money to their districts just like Republicans, and it stands to reason the people writing and voting for the bill have more pull than those out teabagging.

[Jaron]

The obvious answer is that most Republican areas are Republican for a reason - they don't need money.

[DontSayBanana]

I also wonder if this accounts for GOP districts whose administrators refused stimulus money.  IIRC, some GOP governors/freeholders/mayors decided to "take a stand" and refuse direct infusions of stimulus money.

[derspiess]

I also wonder if this accounts for GOP districts whose administrators refused stimulus money.  IIRC, some GOP governors/freeholders/mayors decided to "take a stand" and refuse direct infusions of stimulus money.

Does that matter?

[DontSayBanana]

Does that matter?

The article doesn't make it clear whether it reviewed data of what the government tried to send out or data of what the districts actually took in.  If they reviewed the intake side, it could matter quite a bit.

[Admiral Yi]

Aside from valid reasons like this one that there could be a disparity, is anyone surprised by this? Democrats funnel money to their districts just like Republicans, and it stands to reason the people writing and voting for the bill have more pull than those out teabagging.

Yes, surprised.  Pork is bipartisan and gets spread pretty evenly (at least it did under Wubya).  You're just not supposed to pass a gigantic economic crisis spending bill and lard it up for the home team.