Jeff Pelline's Sierra Foothills Report

Slate magazine has put pen to paper on a trend I’ve always wondered about: The states – or counties, for that matter- with the highest anti-government spending sentiment are often the largest beneficiaries of government spending.

I have no problem with this; I just find it ironic in light of the “Tarzan-like” rhetoric from the tea party and extreme right nowadays.  

“Republicans have a near monopoly on complaints about government spending. Dozens of new Tea Party candidates were elected to Congress on a promise to clean house. But data going back two decades—to stick to (Senator Alan) Simpson’s crude metaphor—show the ‘milk’ is mostly coming from Democratic states, and the sucking is being done by Republican states,” the magazine writes.

“The ‘red’ states up in arms about government spending receive the largest share of it. This is not a new finding, but research by economist Gary Richardson at the University of California-Irvine backs it up. Richardson provides insight into how the paradox came about and what it means for the future.”

“No sane person would argue that every state should get precisely as much as it puts in. Different states will need larger or smaller benefits at different points of time. But Richardson’s data don’t just show that the redistribution of resources correlates with a state’s political orientation. They show that the amount of money being collected from Democratic states and redirected to Republican states has systematically grown over time.”

The article, including Simpson’s crude metaphor, is here.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 3 Comments »

I was born in Pasadena (at the Henry Huntington Hospital) and grew up nearby, so I’m familiar with the Rose Bowl parade and football game. We used to ride our bikes to watch the floats being built.

“The granddaddy of them all” has grown into one of America’s greatest traditions, with the weather being a big draw for the viewers back East (at least when California wasn’t the butt of so many jokes, as it is now).

I’ve always enjoyed the Pac-10 vs. Big-10 matchups. My alma mater Cal Berkeley hasn’t been to the Rose Bowl since the year I was born. But Northwestern University, where I went to graduate school, played USC in a surprise matchup in 1996. My wife and I went (“Hail to Purple”) and watched them lose.

My personal choice for this year’s Rose Bowl would have been a matchup like Stanford and Ohio St. (Both are nationally ranked though neither won their conference).

But nowadays we’ve turned over the college bowl matchups to computers, so this year the “Horned Frogs” from Texas Christian University are expected to play in the Rose Bowl against Wisconsin (the Big 10 co-champion).

It’s a weird matchup for a traditionalist but will pit one of the nation’s best offensive teams against one of the best defensive teams. It also will generate some out-of-state discretionary spending in California, nothing to sneeze about with a crippled economy.

Oddly enough, I once saw the Horned Frogs play football, in the last recession, around 1982. My parents were living in Houston, and some native Houstonians and longtime friends of my parents took us out for a “night on the town” while I was visiting.

It consisted of dinner at “Sonny Look’s ‘Sir-Loin’” steakhouse by the Astrodome – a swank ’50s-like joint with dry martinis, grilled steaks and red booths. Then we went to a football game: TCU versus the University of Houston. I honestly can’t remember who won, and it was my first, and last, trip to the ‘Dome.

We’ll no doubt hole up in the living room for this year’s Rose Bowl, as we always do, but not for the whole game.

Go Horned Frogs!

Filed under: Uncategorized | 1 Comment »