Anyone have a better idea of how to visualize this data? It feels like there should be one – but maybe sometimes a table is the right tool for the job.
January 25th, 2012 at 9:10 am
Would like to see it based on congress rather than president.
Also, 2004 data could be updated. For Example, New Mexico went Obama in 2008.
I’d also like to see the same data minus federal spending due to military bases. Fairly static spending that was likely setup decades ago with little chance of changing no matter who the population is voting for.
January 25th, 2012 at 10:55 am
I second everything that Hawke says above. Very interesting but perhaps there is more pertinent data available which might tell a different story.
January 25th, 2012 at 10:57 am
Yeah, Im calling BS on this chart. That spending is almost so perfectly divided (accept for 9 states) by prez party vote makes this thing suspicious. The party is incidental and not causal. There has to be other factors contributing to this divide that doesn’t fault parties. The clues lay in the outliers. Why are they different?
January 25th, 2012 at 11:40 am
So, Republicans hire smarter accountants? Great finding!
January 25th, 2012 at 7:02 pm
Republicans certainly hire more people to post comments!
January 26th, 2012 at 8:59 am
Interesting stuff. I’ve often heard political science types say that American voters are unusual in tending to vote against their personal economic interests, in both directions. I’ve never seen it displayed so clearly before.
Maybe it’s because in the past the parties were ideologically the other way round, and families and communities stayed loyal? Or maybe we over analyse politics, and globally, higher earners like blue and lower earners like red? :-/
January 26th, 2012 at 11:30 am
Brian C, the point isn’t that it’s causal. The point is that it’s hypocritical that states who benefit the most from government largesse have voters who yell the largest about wanting less government spending.
*loudest, not largest! DYAC
January 26th, 2012 at 3:18 pm
Being color blind for a moment, what’s up with the Get-more’s outnumbering the Give-more’s almost 2-1? Now, THAT’S the American way! NEXT UP: Let’s examine how many of the Give-more states ran budget deficits in 2011, and the total $ amounts for both columns.
January 29th, 2012 at 8:32 pm
How about a column chart normalized to $1.00? In other words, chart the federal spending that exceeds/falls short of federal taxes. States with spending above $1 will have columns sized to spending – $1.00, e.g, $1.03 for New Mexico, and states with spending below $1 will show $1.00 – spending, e.g. -$0.03 for Florida. This way, the getters will clearly fall above the line and the givers will clearly fall below the line. Each column can be colored red or blue as appropriate.
July 1st, 2012 at 3:36 pm
There is a book called Red States feed at Blue State troughs, which shows this data, too. What this shows is the same data. Those States that notoriously vote Republican, are the ones that always need the most help staying solvent. Welfare States. What on earth would happen to these people in Red States, should we ever let the secede and form their own country?? They could not survive . Now when it is PEOPLE who get help, they are called Lazy—what do you call these States?
July 3rd, 2012 at 1:00 pm
Any correlation to legalized gambling?
October 30th, 2012 at 3:07 pm
These are not welfare distrubutions people. This is TOTAL Federal spending by state. http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0479.pdf has the total spending of federal dollars per capita as of 2009. If you use these charts and others like it to show welfare spending, it is a fraud at best. You are mixing apples and oranges. Use the link provided to see Federal spending per capita by state.
Your Name (required)
Your Email (required)
An addictive collection of beautiful charts, graphs, maps, and interactive data visualization toys -- on topics from around the world.
Copyright © 2007-Chart Porn
Wordpress Compositio Theme originally by Design Disease