But they don't want the federal government to pay for things like that. Money for those kinds of programs ends up concentrated in the high population states.
Moreover, if they implement the program then it's permanent. Their own federal legislators could no longer go to Washington and argue for repeal because they'll have the constituents in their own districts up in arms if they try to cancel a program their constituents are already receiving benefits under. Whereas if the governors refuse the money then the state's federal legislators will have every incentive to fight to have the money stripped from the budget in future years.
The response from Blue State governors should be to refuse federal "Homeland Security" money. Give their own legislators cover to repeal that. I mean really, how many police departments legitimately need more SWAT teams?
Moreover, if they implement the program then it's permanent. Their own federal legislators could no longer go to Washington and argue for repeal because they'll have the constituents in their own districts up in arms if they try to cancel a program their constituents are already receiving benefits under. Whereas if the governors refuse the money then the state's federal legislators will have every incentive to fight to have the money stripped from the budget in future years.
The response from Blue State governors should be to refuse federal "Homeland Security" money. Give their own legislators cover to repeal that. I mean really, how many police departments legitimately need more SWAT teams?