Jim Inhofe: “I believe it is always very difficult when we get a complicated formula. We have been talking about how complicated the…”

“I believe it is always very difficult when we get a complicated formula. We have been talking about how complicated the formula is when you take into consideration the growth of States. We are dealing with low-population States. We have a floor. We have donor States and donee States. But the Senator from Arizona is right when he said we actually have more donor States than we had under TEA-21. The disparity amount is far less between the donor and donee States. We are calculating that now. I think the point needs to be answered, and I think we are going to be prepared to do it. A State such as New York, for example, has gone from $1.25--in other words, $1.25 for every dollar that has been put in--down to 99.75. That is down to getting back everything they have put in, but it is dropping down substantially from the amount in the previous bill. I have looked at States to try to defend myself in being fair on this. If you look at TEA-21--that was Senator Moynihan, Representative Schuster, and Senator Chafee--Moynihan's State went up to $1.25; Schuster, $1.20; Chafee, $2.16, and mine--and I am chairman of the committee--is only going to go up to $.95. And we are still going to be a donor State. I think that should demonstrate we are being fair on this. To suggest that Colorado is getting a raw deal, they have the highest rate of return of any State. But formulas are complicated. I am not critical of the Senator from Arizona.”