Bob CollinsProPublica, a public journalism site, has taken data on the economic stimulus spending that recovery.gov should’ve made more accessible and understandable, and made it more accessible and understandable.
One of the things it reveals is the disparity in spending from county to county.
For example, on a per capita basis, these counties are getting the least stimulus money:
| County |
PerCapita
|
Unemployment Rate
|
| Lake of the Woods |
$41
|
6.9%
|
| Lac Qui Parle |
$48
|
5.4%
|
| Anoka |
$50
|
7.9%
|
| Scott |
$83
|
6.8%
|
| Koochiching |
$86
|
7.3%
|
| Roseau |
$92
|
5%
|
| Washington |
$106
|
6.8%
|
These counties are getting the most on a per capita basis. Note: I’ve taken Ramsey County out of the list because the system puts statewide projects in the county where the state capital is.
| County |
PerCapita
|
Unemployment Rate
|
| Lincoln |
$4,997
|
4.5%
|
| Yellow Medicine |
$2,693
|
5.1%
|
| Chippewa |
$1,268
|
6.1%
|
| Big Stone |
$1,131
|
4.5%
|
| Cook |
$1,018
|
4.7%
|
| Kandiyohi |
$1,006
|
5.5%
|
The stimulus plan is, by definition, a jobs and economic development plan. But as you can see by the charts, the big winners on a per capita basis also have some of the lowest unemployment rates in the state. Is that as a result of the stimulus? No. The unemployment rates for all of these counties have tracked the statewide average.
How is it that Lincoln County has attracted so much money? A rural water project intended to connect 800 users to a public water supply. Many of the consumers are farms.
