Framework Needed For Pursuit Of Federal Dollars
By: Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President
As the Nevada Vision Stakeholders group prepares to finish its assigned task of coming up with goals for Nevada to strive to achieve with 5, 10 and 20 year benchmarks, one of the topics drawing a fairly strong emphasis is the need for the state to obtain all possible funding from Washington, D.C.. Seeking maximum federal funding was also offered by the Spending and Government Efficiency (SAGE) Commission in their 41st recommendation when they put forward…
Reading between the lines, I’m not certain that the Vision Stakeholders group and the SAGE Commission are totally in sync with one another on their perspectives of Nevada tracking down all the available federal dollars that can be wrung from Washington, D.C. SAGE seemed to be looking at the problem of getting “our fair share” from the perspective of needing to have the person-power and job responsibilities of filling out the grant applications. It seems that the Vision Stakeholders motivation might be more along the lines of having enough state dollars raised to meet the match for Federal costs-sharing.
There is probably need in both regards to be as successful as apparently our desire to be successful would indicate. It takes work to go after the free money that Washington, D.C. has available and whether in the details or matching requirements, the Federal “free dollars” aren’t always completely “free”.
The idea of having a formal structure, as envisioned by the SAGE Commission, could provide additional strength to address a problem that I see as being a short-coming for the burning desire that Nevada seems to be having for Federal dollars. As we are seeing with the example for the educational program “Race To The Top” Federal stipulations also include provisions intended to shape public policy to conform with Federal Government desires for certain outcomes.
Chasing Federal largess as a goal unto itself offers some risk of creating long-term ramifications (both in the form of policy and expanded forms of state/local government) which might warrant a decision to say “No, Thanks” in certain instances. Through some mechanism there needs to be an oversight process which weighs the worth and consequences of obtaining the Federal handouts being offered.
The idea of raising state taxes to have more available funds to capture Federal money also requires serious public examination. Improving operations of various Nevada programs may require increases in revenue to achieve proper funding and with these additional resources opportunities may become available for Federal partnerships in covering the cost, however that approach should be considered on a very selective case-by-case basis and not on any type of one-size-fits-all frame of mind.
Bringing home more Federal bacon as a goal to itself is not and should not be a pursuit Nevada gets itself into. Restraint and prudence are very worthwhile attributes which Nevada government should more vigorously consider as commendable pursuits surpassing the ends of increasing cash from Federal sources.
As the Nevada Vision Stakeholders group prepares to finish its assigned task of coming up with goals for Nevada to strive to achieve with 5, 10 and 20 year benchmarks, one of the topics drawing a fairly strong emphasis is the need for the state to obtain all possible funding from Washington, D.C.. Seeking maximum federal funding was also offered by the Spending and Government Efficiency (SAGE) Commission in their 41st recommendation when they put forward…
“Create a communication structure, managed by a Nevada State Grants Coordinator, to facilitate dissemination of grant application opportunities and collaborative application efforts between agencies, counties and local governments and non-profits, and identify a resource pool of experts and grant writers to support agencies in preparing applications. Create Grant Writer positions in selected state departments based on availability of grant opportunities.”In their background support information the SAGE Commission pointed out that on a per capita basis by Federal Agency, Nevada is ranked 50th in the U.S. Census Bureau report on Federal Aid to States for Fiscal Year 2008. They further detail findings that show Nevada bringing in only 75-cents on each Federal tax dollar as opposed to 95-cents for other states in the Western region.
Reading between the lines, I’m not certain that the Vision Stakeholders group and the SAGE Commission are totally in sync with one another on their perspectives of Nevada tracking down all the available federal dollars that can be wrung from Washington, D.C. SAGE seemed to be looking at the problem of getting “our fair share” from the perspective of needing to have the person-power and job responsibilities of filling out the grant applications. It seems that the Vision Stakeholders motivation might be more along the lines of having enough state dollars raised to meet the match for Federal costs-sharing.
There is probably need in both regards to be as successful as apparently our desire to be successful would indicate. It takes work to go after the free money that Washington, D.C. has available and whether in the details or matching requirements, the Federal “free dollars” aren’t always completely “free”.
The idea of having a formal structure, as envisioned by the SAGE Commission, could provide additional strength to address a problem that I see as being a short-coming for the burning desire that Nevada seems to be having for Federal dollars. As we are seeing with the example for the educational program “Race To The Top” Federal stipulations also include provisions intended to shape public policy to conform with Federal Government desires for certain outcomes.
Chasing Federal largess as a goal unto itself offers some risk of creating long-term ramifications (both in the form of policy and expanded forms of state/local government) which might warrant a decision to say “No, Thanks” in certain instances. Through some mechanism there needs to be an oversight process which weighs the worth and consequences of obtaining the Federal handouts being offered.
The idea of raising state taxes to have more available funds to capture Federal money also requires serious public examination. Improving operations of various Nevada programs may require increases in revenue to achieve proper funding and with these additional resources opportunities may become available for Federal partnerships in covering the cost, however that approach should be considered on a very selective case-by-case basis and not on any type of one-size-fits-all frame of mind.
Bringing home more Federal bacon as a goal to itself is not and should not be a pursuit Nevada gets itself into. Restraint and prudence are very worthwhile attributes which Nevada government should more vigorously consider as commendable pursuits surpassing the ends of increasing cash from Federal sources.
Posted by Doug Busselman at 4/7/2010 3:51 AM 
Categories: Nevada Vision Project
Tags: Vision Group Nevada Budget State Spending Taxes Nevada Legislature
Categories: Nevada Vision Project
Tags: Vision Group Nevada Budget State Spending Taxes Nevada Legislature
Comments