Nevada last in list of federal dollars spent per person

Suzanne Struglinski

Thursday, Oct. 7, 2004 | 11:15 a.m.

WASHINGTON -- Nevada received $11 billion through federal spending in 2003, but ranks last among states in the amount of federal dollars per person, according to a report released today by the Census Bureau.

The government spent roughly $5,193 per person in the state, based on the bureau's calculation of every federal dollar spent in the state from U.S. Postal Service salaries, Medicare payments and Social Security checks to Energy Department contracts and military base services.

While the Census report shows the government spent $11 billion in Nevada, the IRS collected $13 billion in taxes last year from Nevadans, according to the agency.

Report author Jerry Keffer said that while the state is last on the list in overall spending per-person, Nevada is not last in every category.

Nevada ranks 50th per person in grant money spent in the state, but 28th in purchases and contracts and 35th in money spent per person for salaries and wages.

And though it is the lowest amount on the list, the federal spending per-person in Nevada is not far below the amounts calculated for other states with low spending per person, Keffer said.

In Minnesota, which ranks 49th, the government spent $5,451 person and in 48th-ranked Wisconsin it spent $5,525. Alaska received the most per person, $12,243, but received just under $8 billion total.

The per-person spending in Nevada was based on a population of 2.2 million, while Alaska had only about 649,000 people.

Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., said it is important to break the report down and closely examine the numbers.

"I think we do pretty well with what we can control here in the U.S. Senate," Ensign said. "The vast majority of this is because Nevada is more fiscally conservative with programs that are federally matched. We manage our money better."

Ensign said Congress's approval of using annual population figures for determining how the government allocated federal education money instead of the longstanding practice of using the Census population figures for 10 years is not reflected in this report.

With the ever-increasing state population, Ensign's staff is going through various federal programs to see which are based on population numbers and to see if Ensign could try to change the formula.

"I don't go after what I consider pork-barrel projects," Ensign said. "But if there is a category of money out there, if you can't get rid of this category, we fight to get our fair share of money."

Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., although he had not seen the report yet, said he always is interested in increasing the state's return on tax dollars paid to the government.

He also had a different take than Ensign on pork-barrel spending.

"Pork projects are in the eyes of the other person not receiving the tax dollars," Gibbons said.

He said the government needs to look at states the are losing population but get the same amount of federal money as they did when they had more people.

"The size of the pie is the same, but it's the share that needs to change," Gibbons said. "We are a contributing state not a receiving state."

Keffer said states with older urban area and industrialize cities receive money for police, schools, waste clean-up and other things. He said he has not done a full analysis on Nevada, but there may not just be a "magnet" for those types of funds yet.

"I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing," he said. "It's a newer community, it isn't attracting the same program dollars are other cities."