Zeuslax wrote:Typically Hackalicious those numbers are indicative of how a state votes in the presidential election. The winning party usually will reward the states that went there way. Alaska usually doesn't follow this rule. Due to their powerful Senator on the Appropriations committee. Hence, the bridge to no where we saw recently. Michigan also this past election year somehow bucked that trend too. This past election cycle MI received an unprecedented amount of funds for roads.
You do make a good point in that New York, California, and Massachusetts all have Republican governors. Meanwhile, states like Tennessee, Wyoming, and Kansas all have Democrats in the statehouse.
One caveat of the link I posted is that it might include spending for military bases. That would greatly distort places like Alaska and Hawaii.
Another issues is that small states, especially ones with a single representative, are disproportionately represted in congress, so can be expected to get a disproportionate amount of funds. A voter in a place like North Dakota "counts" more than a Californian.
This whole "red/blue" dichotomy is pretty ridiculous and I think is largely a result of dumbed-down media. I took Sonny's bait and played into it, though.