States with few virus cases get big share of relief aid

[riversedge]

Source: AP



By GEOFF MULVIHILL 21 minutes ago


Alaska, Hawaii, Montana and Wyoming are not epicenters of the coronavirus pandemic. Yet these four states scored big this spring when Congress pumped out direct federal aid, while the two hardest-hit states, New York and New Jersey, got comparatively little given the vast numbers of cases and deaths they have seen.

An Associated Press analysis shows that some states with small populations like these took in an out-sized share of the $150 billion in federal money that was designed to address coronavirus-related expenses, when measured by the number of positive tests for the COVID-19 disease.


Their haul ranged from $2 million per positive test in Hawaii to nearly $3.4 million per test in Alaska. In Wyoming, with less than 600 positive cases, the $1.25 billion it received equates to 80 percent of its annual general state budget.

By comparison, New York and New Jersey received about $24,000 and $27,000, respectively, for each positive coronavirus test. Other states with high numbers of cases, including Massachusetts, Michigan and Illinois, received less than $100,000 per case.

“If there’s a fire, you don’t spray the whole neighborhood. You spray the house that’s on fire,” said Bill Hammond, director of public health policy at the Empire Center for Public Policy, a nonpartisan government watchdog in New York. He said it doesn’t make sense in this case to follow the normal political procedure of giving every state so much in the face of a public health crisis.

To be sure, the lowest population states often receive higher dollar amounts per capita when Congress doles out federal aid. That’s due in part to political reality: Small states have the same number of U.S. senators as more populous ones, and those senators lobby hard for their states’ interests.

The awards in the relief act passed in late March were based on population, but with a catch: Every state was to receive at least $1.25 billion, regardless of its size. Lawmakers said setting such a minimum was needed to reach a deal in a divided government.


In the coronavirus fight, the disproportionate share going to smaller states has consequences. States with high numbers of infections and deaths say they need that money for immediate expenses related to fighting an outbreak that threatened to overwhelm their hospital systems, from staff overtime to setting up makeshift hospitals.

..............................................

Read more: https://apnews.com/48b8109fce0d922a8fb0f5fce20dee92?utm_medium=AP&utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter

---

Link to tweet

?s=20

[msongs]

1. if hawaii got 1.25 billion its certainly been well hidden nt

[underpants]

2. Sen. Leahy was a big part of this

As stated in the article he’s been big on this for a while. I remember reading that he made a big stand during the initial stimulus bill.

[Igel]

3. So what they're saying is this:

When measured by a metric that's not part of the law and reflects only one type of expense, states like Hawaii and Vermont benefit disproportionately. Why, they may get a huge amount each--maybe 1% of the total.

That's blatantly unfair, assuming that the only expense to be covered are positive tests. But it's also for preparing extra capacity, buying PPE, all those negative tests, etc., etc.

Somebody should tell Houston that it's only permitted to spend the money on positive tests. I mean, look at the horribly RW purpose they're going to put part of that sacred funding towards: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Houston-to-use-15M-in-federal-relief-funds-to-15248651.php

Clearly, Houston doesn't need that money.

It's a horrible thing when the Senate and Trump conspire to pass a bill without the House's seeing it or even notifying (D) senators, because there's no question that this injustice would have been caught by Senator Schumer and Representative Pelosi.

[ancianita]

4. So Cuomo's right.

[ancianita]

5. The money goes to red states with lying leaders. Blue states that GIVE MORETAX MONEY THAN

THEY GET, historically, will suffer punishment for both expecting help in a deadly pandemic, and self-sufficiently running themselves as the feds go derelict in helping them.

Blue states get nothing for saving lives and living responsibly.

Have I got that right?

So now, if all the non-recipient blue states refuse to pay taxes in July -- sure, everyone can file -- because they're OWED their money back!

What will the Treasury and IRS do -- confiscate all blue state properties? Hardly.

They can't do anything. No one's going to jail. What, they'll send brown shirts out? No.

They'll have to wait for indebted states to get their economies going at their own responsible rate, then wait for back taxes to get negotiated at pennies on the dollar. OR FORGIVE all debt. That's what they will do for red states.

This administration are killers and asset stripping orcs.

They are the parasitic vampire squid that sucks the wealth and treasure of its inhabitants and turns the disunited states land base into a shit hole country.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

6. Similarly, I understand huge sums of money

have gone to rural places or small cities as part of the Patriot Act or one of those. All about keeping terrorists from overrunning those places.