There are no free lunches. Federal dollars come laced with strings. Some axioms just keep proving themselves true. As the ink dries on the latest $2 trillion tranche of federal pandemic relief — the American Rescue Plan — states are learning that the roughly $350 billion of "free" federal aid comes with strings attached. Wonders never cease.
States are discovering and news outlets are reporting some surprising features of the new law. For starters, the President Biden Joe Biden The Hill’s Morning Report — Presented by Facebook — Biden delivers 100 million shots in 58 days, doses to neighbors Advocates demand transparency in Biden migrant facilities The Memo: America faces long war with extremism MORE -approved American Rescue Plan tweaks the funding formula to distribute funding based on average unemployment during the three final months of 2020 — rewarding Democratic-controlled states like New York, California and Illinois for their draconian COVID policies that resulted in the nation's highest levels of unemployment. And it offers states billions more in Medicaid funding if they agree to boost their own Medicaid spending.
Perhaps the most troubling is a legislative rider barring states that accept the aid from using the funds "to either directly or indirectly offset a reduction in the net tax revenue" derived "from a change in law, regulation, or administrative interpretation during the covered period that reduces any tax (by providing for a reduction in a rate, a rebate, a deduction, a credit, or otherwise) or delays the imposition of any tax or tax increase."
This suggests that, for the duration of the spending program, if a state accepts these funds it can't pursue meaningful tax reform or, for example, use tax incentives for their citizens to secure the best educational options for their children through vouchers or tax credits. Permanent spending increases? Fine. Rewards for failed policies? No problem. Lower state taxes? No way.
It is Congress's prerogative to attach federal conditions to federal money, but that constitutional prerogative has limits — and it remains to be seen whether this particular condition crosses the line. But even if the "no tax cuts" condition passes constitutional muster, its naked attempt to impose tax homogeneity across the country shocks the conscience.
So-called "red states" and "blue states" pursue very different strategies to grow their economies and help their citizens flourish. Low-tax red states like Florida, Texas and Tennessee successfully attract talent, investment and industry away from high-tax blue states like New York, California, and Connecticut. This flight from high-priced, high-tax havens highlights the differences between red and blue governing philosophies. And congressional Democrats don't like it.
The exodus is real. Tesla's Elon Musk Elon Reeve Musk A new battle in a long war: Why Blinken must stand strong against China’s abuses Tesla on autopilot hits Michigan state trooper’s patrol car Teen responsible for major Twitter hack to serve three years in prison MORE recently announced that he has moved from Silicon Valley to the Lone Star State. Whether Musk will take Tesla's headquarters with him remains unclear, but software heavyweight Oracle will soon be joining him. And consider Wall Street's escape from New York. As Forbes reported in December, "Credit Suisse, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Barclays, UBS, Citigroup, Alliance Bernstein and an array of other financial institutions have established and aggressively staffed hubs in Florida, North Carolina, Salt Lake City, Dallas, Nashville and other less expensive locations compared to New York."
People vote with their feet, too. As Bloomberg reported last year, "New York, California and Illinois have been hemorrhaging residents. Almost 3.2 million more people left those states for elsewhere in the U.S. than arrived from other states, from 2010 through 2019," according to Census Bureau population estimates . The out-migration means dwindling sales and income tax revenues and fewer seats in Congress for blue states. Meanwhile, red state populations and government coffers swell.
With New York Governor Andrew Cuomo Andrew Cuomo Yankees and Mets will allow some fans in stadiums starting April 1 Alcohol industry seeks to lock in pandemic gains Cuomo’s office opens its own investigation into groping allegations: report MORE predicting more tax hikes for his residents, and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio Bill de Blasio De Blasio touts city’s new climate bills: ‘This will make New York City safer, stronger’ Queens DA requests dismissal of nearly 700 cases related to sex work WaPo critic chastises CNN for its ‘love-a-thon’ interviews between Cuomo brothers MORE declaring "very bluntly" that his administration's "mission is to redistribute the wealth," it is not hard to fathom why low-tax red states are gaining ground in the nation's economic tug-of-war.
Enter Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer Chuck Schumer Biden must keep his health care promises FEMA pauses flood insurance rate update after Schumer pushback: report Exclusive: GOP officials offer support for Vanita Gupta MORE . His "perfecting amendment" to the federal aid package effectively dictates state fiscal and tax policy for the foreseeable future. Red states would no longer be able to entice newcomers with further rounds of state tax relief.
Federalism — that great political innovation that allows Oregon to pass laws that Alabama won't, and vice-versa — should also allow states like Ohio to adopt competitive tax policies that New Jersey won't. But federalism be damned in Mr. Schumer's America. It seems that if progressives can't beat 'em and won't join 'em, they'll just have to get Congress to bribe 'em, and make low-tax states an offer they should refuse.
Michael G. Franc is a Washington, D.C.-based senior fellow with The Buckeye Institute . From 2013 to 2015 he served as policy director and counsel to then-House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy Kevin McCarthy House rejects GOP resolution to boot Swalwell from Intel panel McCarthy in combative exchange with CNN’s Raju on election Schiff defends Swalwell as ‘trusted’ member of intel panel MORE .
- State of Decay 2 Boasts No Microtransactions and Cross-Platform Play
- State of Decay 2 PC performance review: a little buggy around the edges
- With State of Decay 2 coming soon, here's why the original is still the best zombie game ever
- The Brexiteers will slash the state. Theresa May must call their bluff
- Democrats get ready to ram through next phase of Donald Trump impeachment inquiry in face of Republican objections as he demands his party 'stand together and defender the leader' against 'smears'
- Publishers Use US Tax Code to the Tune of Billions
- Violent game makers would be denied tax credit under new reform blueprint
- What A Relief: Talking To UKIE About UK Tax Breaks
- The Godfather: A New Don Review – A Game You Can’t Refuse
- State of Decay 2 Review – Rigor Mortis
- U.S. House committee seeks President Trump's tax returns from IRS
- Trump says meeting with Democrats on government shutdown was 'total waste of time'
- Trump voters carry Republicans in the Senate, while Democrats are poised to take the House
- The FCC to Take Steps Towards Subsidizing Broadband Internet for Low Income Households
- Greitens lied to state ethics commission, took charity donor list, report says
- Republicans flip Indiana Senate seat red, Mike Braun beats Democratic incumbent Joe Donnelly
- Free The Art & Making of Aquaman Book Giveaway
- Kingdom Come Deliverance on PC offers huge upgrades over console
- Smite organisation banned from pro league after players refuse to sign $1 salary contract
- Dear Andrea Leadsom, shrinking the state is the opposite of patriotism
Democrats make low-tax states an offer they should refuse have 1279 words, post on thehill.com at March 19, 2021. This is cached page on Talk Vietnam. If you want remove this page, please contact us.