Federal Funding in the South: Bringing Home the Bacon, but Where’s the Beef?

Richard J Reeder,Faqir S Bagi,Samuel D Calhoun

doi:10.52324/001c.8480

Abstract

The South receives more federal funding per capita than other regions, but much of the South’s funding advantage comes from the defense and space industries and other functions serving national rather than regional or local objectives. In contrast, most programs designed to achieve regional and local development objectives do not particularly benefit the South, and the non-metro South gets relatively fewer of many of these programs then nonmetro areas nationwide. Metro areas generally receive more federal funds per capita than nonmetro areas, but this metro-nonmetro gap is larger in the South than elsewhere in the country. Another nationwide pattern that is particularly present in the South is that federal spending tends to favor higher-income areas, especially among metro areas. While federal spending may help mitigate growth disparities nationwide, we found no evidence of this in the South.

Highlights

As the South's share of U.S population has grown from 32.7 percent in 1980 to 35.2 percent in 1997 (Beale 1999, p. 21), its political influence in Washington has grown with its population
A close look at the composition and geographic distribution of these funds suggests that the South may not be benefiting as much as the funding totals indicate and, in some respects, federal funding may be adding to the South's problems
One study of nonmetro areas found a correlation of the two indicators to be -.68 in 1985 (Reeder 1990). This suggests the presence of a fair number of counties with both relatively high poverty rates and relatively high average incomes. Another possible explanation for the paradox may lie in the correlation coefficient reflecting variations among nonpoverty counties with different incomes. lD-Jhe correlation was weaker in nonmetro areas, and we found that nonmetro poverty counties got somewhat more federal funds than other types of nonmetro counties

Summary

Introduction

As the South's share of U.S population has grown from 32.7 percent in 1980 to 35.2 percent in 1997 (Beale 1999, p. 21), its political influence in Washington has grown with its population. As the South's share of U.S population has grown from 32.7 percent in 1980 to 35.2 percent in 1997 21), its political influence in Washington has grown with its population. Southern representatives have attained powerful leadership positions in both the House of Representatives and Senate, as well as in the White House. These developments have led some to observe that the South is attracting more federal money these days, where congressional leaders are seated (Earle 1998). A close look at the composition and geographic distribution of these funds suggests that the South may not be benefiting as much as the funding totals indicate and, in some respects, federal funding may be adding to the South's problems

Objectives

Results

Conclusion