Texas' fast-growing debt tops that of U.S. government's

[one...two...tree 2,762]

For all the controversy over the national debt ceiling, here's a surprise: Since 2001, the debt load in conservative Texas has grown faster than the federal debt.

Texas has been borrowing more than most other states, too. And local entities, from cities to school districts to transit authorities, have been piling up even more debt.

From 2001 to 2010, state debt alone grew from $13.4 billion to $37.8 billion, according to the Texas Bond Review Board. That's an increase of 281 percent. Over the same time, the national debt rose almost 234 percent, with two wars, two tax cuts and stimulus spending.

The sets of numbers are not easily comparable, and not just because one is counted in billions and the other in trillions. National figures exclude some obligations, and the Texas total includes so-called conduit bonds, for which the state is not necessarily liable if the borrowers default.

Still, the trend is undeniable. While Texas lawmakers have refused to raise taxes -- and often criticize Washington for borrowing and spending -- the state has been paying for much of its expansion with borrowed money.

That's not a bad thing, if everybody can handle the debt service and spend the money prudently. Texas' population grew almost twice as fast as the nation's in the past decade, so it needs new highways, schools, prisons and more.

Local borrowing accounts for almost 85 percent of public debt in Texas, because the government is so decentralized. Combine state and local borrowing, and Texas ended fiscal 2008 with $216 billion in total debt, up from $98 billion in 2001, according to census figures. (The latest census data for local debt is 2008.)

The borrowing isn't slowing. New issues expected for 2011 include $2 billion for transportation, $434 million for water projects and $235 million for cancer research. All those are paid from the state's general fund.

Much more borrowing is planned for debt that's supported by revenue and user fees. And local borrowing dwarfs all the categories.

Texas doesn't appear to be overextended. In a May report, Standard & Poor's gave the state an AA+ rating, citing its outperforming economy, strong cash management and constitutional limits on debt.

"Texas has what we consider to be a very low net debt burden," S&P wrote. In part, that's because so much debt is borne by local governments. Per capita, only Tennessee has a smaller state tax burden than Texas. But on local debt, only New York and Washington, D.C., are larger, according to the website usgovernmentspending.com.

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/07/18/117702/commentary-texas-fast-growing.html?storylink=MI_emailed#ixzz1SXSqCGmb

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Texas would be in worse shape if Uncle Sam's teat was to dry up. That state's been sucking it on all nipples.

[tmma 467]

Texas would be in worse shape if Uncle Sam's teat was to dry up. That state's been sucking it on all nipples.

Texas=donor state. Doesn't suck as much as the majority of other states.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Texas is a Republican state. Texas doesn't tax the hell out of everybody. All things considered Texas has been quite successful. So should I really be surprised that the lefties want to make Texas look bad...

Washington needs to take a look at Texas and take some notes.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Mcclatchy twisting things as usual?

Who woulda thunk it?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Texas=donor state. Doesn't suck as much as the majority of other states.

The claim:

Texas routinely receives more federal dollars than Texans pay in federal taxes

The Verdict:

[Obama 2012 1,714]

The claim:

Texas routinely receives more federal dollars than Texans pay in federal taxes

The Verdict:

of course if you read the whole thing, then Texas only got more than it paid in on 6 of the 25 occasions in their period.

So actually it stands to reason overall, Texas paid in a lot more than it ever got back.

Of course Rachel Madcow twisting facts? Mcclatchy twisting facts? Nope. No ** would ever do that.

[Ban Hammer 13,352]

The claim:

Texas routinely receives more federal dollars than Texans pay in federal taxes

The Verdict:

The paid taxes included ..... wages of federal employees

sure is a lot of military bases in texas.....

[tmma 467]

The claim:

Texas routinely receives more federal dollars than Texans pay in federal taxes

The Verdict:

LOL at ' mostly true...' I think it took you quite some time to find this piece from politifacts?

I don't want to play battle of the links with you but this link

http://www.taxfounda...show/22685.html

scroll down for TX.

edit- sorry, i need more coffee got the source of link wrong ( 2 windows open).

Edited July 19, 2011 by tmma

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

LOL at ' mostly true...' I think it took you quite some time to find this piece from politifacts?

I don't want to play battle of the links with you but this link

http://www.taxfounda...show/22685.html

scroll down for TX.

edit- sorry, i need more coffee got the source of link wrong ( 2 windows open).

I'm aware of the tax foundation material and I am aware that Texas received $0.94 for every dollar in federal taxes paid over the period captured. I am also aware that all those liberal states Texans and other 'real Americans' despise so much contribute much more to the feds - think NJ leads the list with a $0.61 return on their federal tax dollars but NY, IL, CA and others are also heavily supporting the feds - subsidizing mostly consertvative stongholds. And over the last few years, Texas has relied heavily on federal funds in excess of what the state paid to close it's Texas sized budget gaps. The latter is all I was saying in my first comment and that continues to hold true.

Edited July 19, 2011 by Mr. Big Dog

[tmma 467]

I'm aware of the tax foundation material and I am aware that Texas received $0.94 for every dollar in federal taxes paid over the period captured. ......

thus making it a donor state - which means my 1st comment continues to hold true.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

I'm aware of the tax foundation material and I am aware that Texas received $0.94 for every dollar in federal taxes paid over the period captured. I am also aware that all those liberal states Texans and other 'real Americans' despise so much contribute much more to the feds - think NJ leads the list with a $0.61 return on their federal tax dollars but NY, IL, CA and others are also heavily supporting the feds - subsidizing mostly consertvative stongholds. And over the last few years, Texas has relied heavily on federal funds in excess of what the state paid to close it's Texas sized budget gaps. The latter is all I was saying in my first comment and that continues to hold true.

The overall record is what matter though and your point is moot in a down economy.

While we might be growing here, the sales tax receipts were down just like with the rest of the country. We had forclosures (therefore loss of property tax revenue) as well, just like the rest of the country.

However, as the tax foundations documents show, this is no where near the norm.

Actually, our problems can be attributed to the FEDERAL government and their actions and lack of action over the course of the past 20 years.

Texas has stood good ground on its own and it's why the recession didn't hit here as hard as it did in many other places.

Of course, we can also look at the trash we've taken in from Louisiana since Katrina. The criminal illegals from Mexico that are burdening the state because the FEDERAL government is lacking in action.

So when you really get down to it all, Texas isn't taking much at all, except for what is needed to clean up the ####### mess that the Feds have left us with.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

thus making it a donor state - which means my 1st comment continues to hold true.

Yes, over the particular period presented in the tax foundation material (1981 - 2005) that's true. Looking at more recent data (say, the last decade), however, it is not. Texas has become a net receiver.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

[tmma 467]

Yes, over the particular period presented in the tax foundation material (1981 - 2005) that's true. Looking at more recent data (say, the last decade), however, it is not. Texas has become a net receiver.

this map's date is April 2011

http://www.mtc.ca.go...Blue_vs_Red.pdf

Edited July 19, 2011 by tmma