Transportation stimulus money heads for farm country
Dante Chinni
Posted: 10.22.2009 / 8:30 AM PDT
When it comes to securing highway funds from the federal stimulus package, there is one clear winner thus far: rural, agricultural America.
The 287 counties identified as “Tractor Country” in Patchwork Nation have received an average of $144 per capita in stimulus highway dollars, according to a new analysis by the Patchwork Nation project and ProPublica, an independent nonprofit news organization. That is by far the largest per capita amount.
The next closest, at $21 per capita, are the 362 counties of “Minority Central” (places with many African-Americans or native Americans). Bringing up the rear are America’s 41 big-city counties – the “Industrial Metropolis.” They have secured only 41 cents per capita.
This analysis measures dollars from the stimulus that are going to road and bridge projects in specific counties as of Sept. 25. It does not include statewide grants that may be spent in any number of jurisdictions. The dollars that could be tracked to a specific county, however, make up the bulk of the transportation money spent so far – more than 90 percent.
A few trends are apparent from our analysis. First, the money is being dispersed slowly: In most of our 12 community types, only about 10 percent has been spent. Second, in many cases, it is not going to the places that arguably need it most – the places with the highest levels of unemployment.
Harvesting cash?
As big a winner as “Tractor Country” is in the money already spent, it stands to do even better as the obligated money is dispersed. An additional $2.2 billion is set to be spent in “Tractor Country,” a whopping $1,137 per person. No other community type comes close: “Minority Central” is second in obligated money, with $147 per person.
What’s behind the big money flowing into agricultural America? Without question, part of it has to do with the sparse population there. Only 1.9 million people live in the 287 counties of “Tractor Country.” In general, a smaller number of people can mean higher per capita numbers.
For instance, $6.9 million in transportation funding is slated to go to one big project in Thomas County, Neb., which has roughly 600 residents. That works out to about $11,000 per capita.
But the money flowing to “Tractor Country” is about more than empty acres. Simply put, more dollars have been directed toward these counties. Only two community types are targeted to receive more than the $2.2 billion of “Tractor Country”: the small-town “Service Worker Centers” ($4.3 billion) and the diversifying “Boom Towns” ($2.8 billion).
There are some good arguments for “Tractor Country” receiving more money. Here’s one: Many streets in these places could use paving and/or widening. For instance, you don’t have to drive too far outside Sioux Center, Iowa – a “Tractor Country” community we regularly visit – before you come upon gravel.
But if the focus of the transportation stimulus is to create jobs – Congress said that transportation projects would create more than half of the envisioned 3.5 million jobs from the stimulus – then “Tractor Country” might not be the best choice for funds. Other places could probably use a more direct infusion of aid.
Where the jobs aren’t
As we have noted often, “Tractor Country” has weathered the recession relatively easily – so far anyway. While the national unemployment figure hovers near 10 percent, in “Tractor Country” it is roughly half that – just a bit more than 5 percent.
The places hit hardest in the recession so far have been “Minority Central,” which has an unemployment rate of about 12 percent, and the “Service Worker Centers” and the “Industrial Metropolis” – both with unemployment rates over 10 percent.
When you look at the money obligated to those three community types, two of them look pretty good. As we already noted, “Minority Central” counties are set to receive about $147 in transportation projects per person. The figure for the “Service Worker Centers” is $145 per person. Those numbers are a far cry from $1,137 person, but better than anywhere else.
The “Industrial Metropolis,” however, stands out for how little it is set to receive: not even $4 per person.
The recession may linger in “Industrial Metropolis” counties, which have large numbers of people living in poverty who may need assistance from strapped city governments.
Other community types with high unemployment are receiving less from the transportation portion of the stimulus. The wealthy and suburban “Monied ’Burbs,” for example, have an unemployment rate near 9 percent, but they’re set to receive only about $28 per capita.
ProPublica has written about this trend before and noted that it stems from Congress disbursing money based on old formulas focused more on miles of road and miles traveled than on economic need. Regardless of reason, the impact is noticeable in these figures.
Not evenly spread
These figures average the highway stimulus over the entirety of our community types. If you look county by county, some places have received lots of money and projects, while others have received none.
You may, in other words, live in a “Monied ’Burb” that has received money for a big highway project, even though the overall picture for “Monied ’Burbs” looks very different.
Those national numbers have a lot to do with the larger economy – and with the national recovery.
October 22nd, 2009 at 11:22 am PDT
[…] Patchwork Nation: American communities in a time of change. > Patchwork Nation Blog | The Christi… patchworknation.csmonitor.com/csmstaff/2009/1022/transportation-stimulus-money-heads-for-farm-country
October 22nd, 2009 at 2:37 pm PDT
Wait, they’re paving over gravel roads outside of small towns? Damn. That’s one of the only places you can get good motorcycle riding in central Illinois where most of the roads are straight and level.
October 22nd, 2009 at 5:37 pm PDT
Have questions about this post or the Patchwork Nation?
As part of a forum with the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, Dante Chinni will answer your questions about what the stimulus money is funding and what difference it is — or isn’t — making across the country.
Submit them here http://www.pbs.org/newshour/forum/business/july-dec09/patchwork_10-22.html and we’ll publish the answers on pbs.org/newshour
October 22nd, 2009 at 6:56 pm PDT
I see you show info to groups black- white- were is the rest us fall in ?
October 22nd, 2009 at 6:57 pm PDT
just a comment………….
I was surprised to find out that so much money went to rural America but they have been overlooked for decades because of the transportation needs within metropolitan areas.
An interesting fact about the metropolitan area where I live is that most of the stimulus money for transportation projects went toward hot mix asphalt pavement maintenance projects. These projects were chosen because they were “shovel ready” or more accurately thrown together quickly. These projects then quickly became reduced in scope or shortened because of mistakes in the plans or estimates that occured because they were prepared in haste. As a result I imagine that the real benefit to the public was almost non-existent. The money kept us busy but it didn’t create any jobs that I can tell because this is a specialized area in construction. It was a nice try though and maybe kept some folks employed for a bit longer.
October 22nd, 2009 at 7:29 pm PDT
I’m not sure you analysis is supporting your conclusions. The idea of the stimulus money was to get it out quickly. This meant “shovel ready” and the rural areas have a lot of projects that always get planed but never get done probably because they have smaller populations. So I don’t think it is surprising that rural counties have a higher dollar per capita project costs.
But just because that is where the project exists does not reflect where the money goes. I would bet those same counties that get money for projects have few or no local jobs on those projects. Road contractors frequently travel long distances from their home locations to develop a project. What evidence do you have that the money spent in these counties actually stays there?
I also think that unemployment rates in rural counties should really be measured differently than a metro area. In a metro area if a person becomes unemployed they show up in your statistics. In a rural area if one person in the family becomes unemployed, but the other member is employed they don’t always file as unemployed, and if neither is unemployed they move from the county to a more urban area looking for work. Therefore a rural county is unlikely to ever support an unemployment rate as high as a metro area. A truer measure of unemployment may be current employment numbers compared to last years population.
October 22nd, 2009 at 8:15 pm PDT
I agree with L S. In North Texas I am not aware of a single rural transportation project that would have provided a local job.
October 22nd, 2009 at 8:46 pm PDT
[…] Patchwork Nation […]
October 22nd, 2009 at 8:59 pm PDT
[…] Chris Amico: Transportation stimulus money heads for farm country (patchworknation.csmonitor.com) - October 22, 2009Chris Amico Transportation stimulus money heads for farm country – http://patchworknation.csmonitor.com/csmstaf… 4 hours ago from Google Reader – Comment – Like Patchwork Nation + ProPublica = Awes
October 23rd, 2009 at 1:20 am PDT
10/23/09
“Reliance upon a single source for money is like a body required to survive with one heart valve or one liver lobe or kidney. The more enduring species are multi-cellular and have more than one organ that functions to ensure the conveyance, sustenance and maintenance of life, a life derived through a widey diverse array of sources including air, water and numerous photo-synthesizing plants… The unnatural dependence upon a single central entity for stimulus to ensure sconomic viability sooner or later had to beconme overtaxed. As detailed in “World Homeostasis” Any institution becoming too large and assumed “too big to fail” like the dinosaurs eventually becomes extinct.”
October 26th, 2009 at 11:52 am PDT
It appears that in your analysis of the President’s stimulus plan, and many of these comments, omit the fact that an important part of the plan is the BUILD AMERICAN BONDS (BAB) many localities can issue bonds for a variety of capital projects whereby the US Government supports their interest costs to 35%. The projects supported by these bonds supports jobs, capital needs and goes to the heart of the fiscal matter of continuing capital improvement. The program also gives investors the opportunity to get a high return on their investment while at the same time supplying funds for long term needs. This is very important and has both short term and long term benefits that I believe you have missed - or eliminated - in your overall assessment.