Hacker News Reader

Comment by cyberax | Hacker News Reader

Don't get so depressed. The Executive branch in the US does not have a lot of power when it comes to influencing the states.

For example, Trump can't actually force states to change their school athlete programs. It doesn't have any power over individual states (or schools). All his DoE can do, is to threaten to withhold funding. And even that is being contested because the Congress has not authorized it.

However, if he does manage to withdraw the funding, that's just 6% of total spending on schools in CA ( https://lao.ca.gov/Education/EdBudget/Details/900 ) and 8% in NY. The states will just shrug and go on.

The discretionary part of the US Federal budget is not large, on the scale of the country.

View on HN

Are states exactly flush with cash to plug even small gaps in school budgets?

You mentioned CA which is rebuilding from massive fires, can they afford that?

What about Arizona, 2021 to 2022 19% of their schools budget was federal funding.

What happens if there is a natural disaster, Trump can withhold funds to force changes. Can a state turn down that level of assistance? They would have to prioritize recovery I assume and just accept the change.

>Don't get so depressed. The Executive branch in the US does not have a lot of power when it comes to influencing the states.

Money is power

Exactly. Look at how Hungary's Orban regime is slowly choking the last stronghold of any kind of political opposition, Budapest. It's a war of attrition.

> You mentioned CA which is rebuilding from massive fires, can they afford that?

Yes.

> What about Arizona, 2021 to 2022 19% of their schools budget was federal funding.

They are an outlier, but mostly because they spend so little: https://educationdata.org/public-education-spending-statisti...

> What happens if there is a natural disaster, Trump can withhold funds to force changes. Can a state turn down that level of assistance? They would have to prioritize recovery I assume and just accept the change.

But many sides can play this game once the can of worms is open.

The thing is, then the next Democratic president (or a Democratic House/Senate) happens and yet another hurricane flattens a part of Florida. What do you think the Florida delegation in the Congress will do when faced with a prospect of not getting help?

> Money is power

Indeed. And the Blue States have way more money than most of the Red states.

I doubt Democrats would threaten to yank hurricane relief funds.

Republicans would.

The shoe only fits on one foot.

> yes

Can you explain why you think this?

The financial outlook isn't good, not terrible but still.

"No Capacity for New Commitments State Faces Annual Multiyear Deficits of Around $20b" [1]

>Indeed. And the Blue States have way more money than most of the Red states.

Based on what? Note that GDP doesn't represent available funds to state governments

>But many sides can play this game once the can of worms is open

Trump has already threatened this to California. Two days ago Newsom asked congress for $20b and ..

"Ric Grenell, a Trump ally serving as his envoy for special missions, said Friday that “there will be conditions” to any federal aid for the state.

He said one of the possible conditions being discussed was defunding the California Coastal Commission, which regulates coastal development and protects public beach access. Trump has criticized the agency as overly restrictive, bureaucratic and a hindrance to timely rebuilding efforts."

>What do you think the Florida delegation in the Congress will do when faced with a prospect of not getting help?

Why would you assume the Democrats would do that?

[1] https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/4939#:~:text=The%20st...

> "No Capacity for New Commitments State Faces Annual Multiyear Deficits of Around $20b" [1]

The budget of California is $320B. This is more than the _entire_ discretionary budget of the US.

> "Ric Grenell, a Trump ally serving as his envoy for special missions, said Friday that “there will be conditions” to any federal aid for the state.

Yeah, these are public statements. I expect that there's frantic back-room dealing right now to make sure that the relief funds are not attached to any conditions. Because in the long-term, that will benefit the states that have money.

> Why would you assume the Democrats would do that?

Because the Democrats who are unwilling to play ball will not get re-elected. I'm not talking about this electoral cycle, this will take a bit more time. For Republicans, it took about 8 years to get from the Tea Party to MAGAs.

> Yeah, these are public statements. I expect that there's frantic back-room dealing right now to make sure that the relief funds are not attached to any conditions. Because in the long-term, that will benefit the states that have money.

I hope so but it also seems people keep thinking Republicans/Trump won't step over a line but end up doing it

>The budget of California is $320B. This is more than the _entire_ discretionary budget of the US.

It's 1.7T https://www.cbo.gov/publication/most-recent/graphics

> I hope so but it also seems people keep thinking Republicans/Trump won't step over a line but end up doing it

I'm sure they'll try. But I'm also sure that this practice of using relief funds as for political pressure won't stick, exactly because money is power.

> It's 1.7T https://www.cbo.gov/publication/most-recent/graphics

Thanks! I meant it in a bit different way: not Defense related, not International Affairs, and not law-enforcement/justice related. By my count, that's $330B.

And did you use the same exceptions to calculate the CA budget?

Congress has authorized it: civil rights laws make schools ineligible when violated, and Trump is claiming various programs violate those.

And this is going to be contested through the courts for many years.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com