Issue Position: The Budget

Issue Position

As has been previously noted, we are going to face a potential $400 million dollar deficit in the upcoming 2011 session. As of yet, we still do not know exactly how much it will be. This is due to a number of different factors, primary, revenues are down. Especially tourism and resources. Tourism is down because the national economy is down. Resources are down because they are dictated by international markets. These markets have been slumping thus bringing down our projected revenues in oil and gas. The state cannot offset a national recession and slumping tourism revenues. However, with oil and gas, when revenues are down, we can make up the difference by increasing production. It should be noted that in the last five years, 80% of state revenue growth has come from oil and gas.

In addition to slumping revenues, we are suffering from poor spending decisions. Since Governor Schweitzer took office in 2005, general fund spending has increased 43% (from $2.5 billion to $3.6 bilion), in addition, the state workforce has been increased by nearly 10% (1000 new state employees). Over half of these new employees make a salary at or above $50,000/year. When Governor Schweitzer ran for office, he promised that he would not raise taxes and has thus far kept that promise. He has reiterated this position by stating that he doesn not support a tax increase in order for the state to meet the 2011 budget deficit. I support him in this endeavor. It should be noted that the Governor has cut executive agencies budgets by 5% to ease the amount of a potential deficit. However, the state constitution mandated he take these actions regardless of whether he wanted too or not. In addition to the cuts already made, we face the real possibility of having to make a 10% across the board cut to the state budget. It needs to be asked if the governor knew we were going to face such a dire economic outlook in 2011 if he would have made all of those increases in general funding spending or increased the state workforce by 10%.

No one wants too take someones job away. I am not advocating that we get rid of the government jobs that the Governor has created. In additon, no one wants to cut the essential services provided by the state government. Most of the cuts the Governor has made thus far are in education and social and human services. I don't want to cut services either. However, increasing the state funded payroll by adding new employees as well as increases to social services have to be paid for. The governor increased both without raising taxes, thus the only way to pay for them is through economic growth. The problem is that not only has our economy not grown, it has shrunk. Thus the budget crisis. It is going to take a lot of soul searching to balance our budget. We will need to look to consolidate departments as well as ways to increase efficiency so that we will not need to get rid of the new state jobs created by the Governor as well as without having to make further reductions in social services.

One of the most common questions asked of current candidates for the state legislature is what cuts they would make to the state budget in order to balance the budget. This is a difficult question to answer without knowing how much the deficit is going to be. However, in my opinion, the answer is much more simple than what many have been advocating. If cuts need to be made, they need to be even cuts across the board. To cut the budget of some governmental departments more or less than that of others suggests that the budget is out of whack to begin with. Government should only be providing services that are needed. Moreover, departments should only be funded by the amount of money that is absolutely necessary for them serve their societal role. To allow some departments to operate with disposable funds and others to operate on a minimal budget is a misuse of taxpayer money. Thus, if the government must make cuts, all departments should have to cut back equally.

Source