One of the reasons why some states are balking at stimulus money is because of the strings attached.
I forget the details, but there were some funds offered for state unemployment funds, but to accept them the states would have to modify their current laws. The net result is they would get an emergency boost of cash, but be obligated to follow fed rules when the crisis ended. At that time, they would be stuck with the permanent higher costs, but with no promise of future aid.
In fact, California was trying to crack down on the program for "at-home" caregivers, which is considered to be one of the programs most tainted with fraud. At first, the feds threatened to yank $6 billion that had been promised to California if they made the reforms in that program. (The reforms would have put a pinch on the unions, so it was more important to placate the unions than reduce waste.)
Looks like California is going to be first.
One of the reasons why some states are balking at stimulus money is because of the strings attached.
I forget the details, but there were some funds offered for state unemployment funds, but to accept them the states would have to modify their current laws. The net result is they would get an emergency boost of cash, but be obligated to follow fed rules when the crisis ended. At that time, they would be stuck with the permanent higher costs, but with no promise of future aid.
In fact, California was trying to crack down on the program for "at-home" caregivers, which is considered to be one of the programs most tainted with fraud. At first, the feds threatened to yank $6 billion that had been promised to California if they made the reforms in that program. (The reforms would have put a pinch on the unions, so it was more important to placate the unions than reduce waste.)