Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Judi Lynn

(160,542 posts)
Sat Oct 19, 2013, 04:29 AM Oct 2013

States with big military, research facilities hurt most by shutdown

Source: Union Leader

October 18. 2013 9:32PM

States with big military, research facilities hurt most by shutdown

By ELAINE S. POVICH
Stateline.org

WASHINGTON — States with large military installations and major research institutions will suffer the most economically from the 16-day federal shutdown — especially the Washington, D.C. area, Hawaii and New Mexico, according to an analysis from Moody's Analytics.

To add insult to injury, states that paid to open national parks in their jurisdictions will not be automatically reimbursed for their expenses. Instead they are fighting for reimbursement with a separate bill in Congress. The states that opened the national parks did so in part because of the economic hit they were taking from curtailed tourism during the shutdown, which affected surrounding communities and state tax revenue.

The U.S. economy is likely to be back to recovery by early 2014, after Congress and the White House reached a bipartisan deal that reopened the federal government and raised the debt ceiling, according to Steven G. Cochrane, managing director of Moody's Analytics.

But the fallout will hurt states long after the deal. Hawaii and New Mexico are affected in an outsize way because of the concentrations of research institutions and civilian employment attached to military bases. The economies of Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Utah and Washington State are also affected more because of large concentrations of federal agencies related to natural resources and land management, Cochrane said.


Read more: http://www.unionleader.com/article/20131018/NEWS06/131019169/-1/news

14 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

sarge43

(28,941 posts)
1. Surprised Cruz's state, Texas, wasn't mentioned.
Sat Oct 19, 2013, 06:35 AM
Oct 2013

San Antonio alone is just about wall to wall Air Force.

tsuki

(11,994 posts)
2. Or Florida. Okaloosa County alone derives 73% of its economy from the military bases. Northwest
Sat Oct 19, 2013, 06:48 AM
Oct 2013

Florida 46%, Northeast Florida 2&%.

 

adieu

(1,009 posts)
10. Military bases were probably not affected
Sat Oct 19, 2013, 12:40 PM
Oct 2013

Other than civilian workers there. Military contractors like Lockheed Martin and others might be affected by having some signed contracts being rescinded or renegotiated.

sarge43

(28,941 posts)
9. So, that Union Leader article is basically wrong?
Sat Oct 19, 2013, 11:34 AM
Oct 2013

The news reports have been conflicted. Quell surprise.

former9thward

(32,019 posts)
11. I don't know if the article was right or wrong.
Sat Oct 19, 2013, 05:08 PM
Oct 2013

But I was just commenting on the status of the AF bases.

sarge43

(28,941 posts)
12. Understand
Sat Oct 19, 2013, 05:13 PM
Oct 2013

On the other, even if only civilian employees at the bases were furloughed, that's still a significant blow to the local economy.

DWinNJ

(261 posts)
4. It's a shame
Sat Oct 19, 2013, 08:09 AM
Oct 2013

It's a shame that money for reimbursement and federal programs can't be proportioned by the percentage of representatives who vote for or against spending bills.
I'm sure most of Aholes know they get to do a photo op of them making a stink and voting against a bill and turn around an do a photo op giving an over-sized check showing how they brought money to the state.

okaawhatever

(9,462 posts)
13. No, they hate scientists because they deal in reality, but the military wasn't
Sat Oct 19, 2013, 09:32 PM
Oct 2013

affected. Civilian employees and federal workers on bases were, but not the actual soldiers themselves. The GOP wouldn't go against them. They're bread and butter for repubs. Why do you think repubs are always pushing for increased military spending?

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»States with big military,...