ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Thursday, October 10, 1996 TAG: 9610100001
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-10 EDITION: METRO
* VIRGINIA RANKS dead last among the states in the receipt, per capita, of federal grant funding.
* Virginia ranks No. 1 among the states in the amount, per capita, of federal spending in the state.
Which statement is true?
Both (wouldn't you know).
Virginia ranks 50th in the amount per capita received in federal grants to states and localities. These grants cover a hundred different programs, from Medicaid, highways, welfare, housing, and nutrition and education subsidies for children living in poverty, to mine safety, rural development and water-conservation efforts.
Census bureau figures show the commonwealth received $535 per capita in such federal grants last year, far below the national average of $866. The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission highlights this fact in a report about the Virginia Liaison Office, the state's lobbying arm in Washington.
On the other hand, as JLARC also points out - and as was confirmed in a recent study by Harvard researchers - Virginia stands atop the national pork barrel when it comes to federal spending of all kinds, grants included.
Last year, the feds spent $7,830 per capita in Virginia, more than in any other state, and well above the $5,160 national average. Like other Southern states, Virginia receives far more in federal dollars than its residents pay out in federal taxes.
This isn't surprising, what with all the civilian and military federal employees and retirees in Northern Virginia and Tidewater, and all the defense work done in the commonwealth.
But why are we doing so poorly in the grants department, compared to overall? JLARC suggests a number of possible explanations. In some cases, the state does not aggressively pursue federal funds (Goals 2000, anyone?). In other cases, some state and local agencies lack technical expertise in formulating grant proposals. And there is no central clearinghouse for tracking grant opportunities. JLARC recommends a study of the problem.
It also recommends that Virginia's lobbying office in Washington, which has a staff of three, be beefed up.
But Virginia does have two senators, the same as other states. One of them, John Warner, is campaigning for re-election by emphasizing how the clout of his seniority has benefited the commonwealth. We also have 11 members in the House of Representatives, all supported by congressional staffs. Like Warner, most are seeking re-election in part by boasting of their effectiveness when it comes to bringing home the bacon.
Then there's the fact that, in some cases, federal grant levels are tied to the amounts that a state pays to meet its own residents' needs. Virginia, observed JLARC, "spends relatively little on social programs."
Indeed, the state's own per-capita spending on Aid to Families with Dependent Children ranked 48th in the nation last year. Virginia's Medicaid spending was 49th.
Devolution to the states is changing the grants system anyway. And the Old Dominion may spend less on social programs, in part, because of all the federal spending in Virginia, which boosts incomes and the economy, thus reducing poverty.
But, while studying its grants problem, Virginia shouldn't overlook the benefits of greater compassion for the needy. To ignore them would be to make a state, which is richer than the national average and No. 1 in federal largess, seem piggy.
LENGTH: Medium: 65 linesby CNB