In approving $144 million cut from K-12 and $150 million from the Department of Economic Services today, apparently House Appropriations Chairman John Kavanaugh (R-Fountain Hills) is unhappy because Democrats haven't 'pitched in.'
There is a good reason for that. Apparently when Kavanaugh, Bob Burns and other Republican leaders in Phoenix suggest that Democrats should 'pitch in,' it means vote for budgets that the Republicans have already written behind closed doors, presumably because they are having so much trouble keeping their own troops in line.
Going along with something somebody tells you they want you to vote for is not 'pitching in.'
Nobody disputes that the state's economic situation is dire, facing a budget deficit that could reach as high as a third of the budget (even after last year's budget cuts.) And while Republicans have controlled the legislature since 1964, which is one reason our 'low tax' state is unable to sustain what we do spend despite being well below the national average in terms of per capita state spending, fixing blame on decades of past failures won't solve today's problems.
Certainly the deficit is so huge that it will require more cuts, and certainly too the situation is so bad that likely a solution is only possible if all sixty members of the house and all thirty members of the Senate work together.
However if the Republican leadership wants a 'bipartisan' budget solution, they have a funny way of showing it in that they are unwilling to actually let Democrats in to help write it before expecting them to vote for it.
True, there was a report that Senator Bob Burns was chasing four specific Democratic members of the Senate to try and buy their votes. But that's hardly negotiating with Democrats. The members of the Democratic caucuses have elected Representative David Lujan as house minority leader and Senator Jorge Garcia as senate minority leader. Any real negotiation with Democrats means meaningful discussions with representative Lujan and senator Garcia and their respective leadership teams.
How bad do things have to get before we get a meaningful discussion down in Phoenix about how the legislature can move forward and solve the problems that the people expect them to solve?
Showing posts with label state budget. Show all posts
Showing posts with label state budget. Show all posts
Monday, November 23, 2009
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
This is what Jan Brewer wrote on July 1. She was right then. Will she still stand by it?
It looks like the Arizona Senate passed (and the house will probably pass tomorrow) a budget similar to the one that Governor Brewer vetoed on July 1 (and just like on that occasion, they also won't refer her sales tax proposal to the ballot.) And just like on that occasion, it cuts even deeper to accomodate a repeal of the state property tax.
Here is what she wrote in explaining her decision to veto the budget on July 1:
"I am deeply disappointed to report to the people of Arizona that the Legislature has been unable to send me a responsible budget plan. While Senate President Bob Burns and House Speaker Kirk Adams have worked with tremendous effort and diligence to reach a reasonable compromise with my proposal, regrettably, those efforts have fallen short.
"As a result, I received early this morning a fatally flawed legislative budget. The legislative budget ignores my consistently expressed goals and instead incorporates devastating cuts to education, public safety, and our state's most vital health services for the frail. In particular this package of bills is shortsighted in that it sets up an enormous revenue shortfall that will severly harm our State's [sic] future.
"Therefore I have carefully and selectively chosen to line-item veto portions of the legislation which allows me to add back funds for vital services and public safety so those critical programs are unaffected. Additionally, due to my actions today, state government services will continue to function. Improvements in education funding, however, will require significantly more legislative work.
"As Governor, I intend to see this through until we have achieved together what I have long advocated -- a prudent budget that neither over-spends nor under-funds. To ensure that happens, I am calling a Special Session of the Legislature and I ask that legislators re-dedicate themselves in a bi-partisan fashion to crafting a budget that reflects favorably on the future of Arizona.
Had the legislature actually followed her advice and chosen to work in a bi-partisan fashion, we would probably have an acceptable budget by now. But their insistence on continuing down the road they were on, trying to create a Republican-only vote (and with the backdrop that a critical block of Republicans were having their votes dictated by Grover Norquist) led them right back down the same dead end.
Now we have to ask whether the Governor meant what she said, especially the last sentence on July 1. If she meant it then she has no choice, she must veto this budget too and demand that Democrats be included in the negotiations this time.
Here is what she wrote in explaining her decision to veto the budget on July 1:
"I am deeply disappointed to report to the people of Arizona that the Legislature has been unable to send me a responsible budget plan. While Senate President Bob Burns and House Speaker Kirk Adams have worked with tremendous effort and diligence to reach a reasonable compromise with my proposal, regrettably, those efforts have fallen short.
"As a result, I received early this morning a fatally flawed legislative budget. The legislative budget ignores my consistently expressed goals and instead incorporates devastating cuts to education, public safety, and our state's most vital health services for the frail. In particular this package of bills is shortsighted in that it sets up an enormous revenue shortfall that will severly harm our State's [sic] future.
"Therefore I have carefully and selectively chosen to line-item veto portions of the legislation which allows me to add back funds for vital services and public safety so those critical programs are unaffected. Additionally, due to my actions today, state government services will continue to function. Improvements in education funding, however, will require significantly more legislative work.
"As Governor, I intend to see this through until we have achieved together what I have long advocated -- a prudent budget that neither over-spends nor under-funds. To ensure that happens, I am calling a Special Session of the Legislature and I ask that legislators re-dedicate themselves in a bi-partisan fashion to crafting a budget that reflects favorably on the future of Arizona.
Had the legislature actually followed her advice and chosen to work in a bi-partisan fashion, we would probably have an acceptable budget by now. But their insistence on continuing down the road they were on, trying to create a Republican-only vote (and with the backdrop that a critical block of Republicans were having their votes dictated by Grover Norquist) led them right back down the same dead end.
Now we have to ask whether the Governor meant what she said, especially the last sentence on July 1. If she meant it then she has no choice, she must veto this budget too and demand that Democrats be included in the negotiations this time.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Price for Harper's vote: Fire people, especially in award-winning Auditor General's Office
The latest update from the lege is that Sen. Jack Harper (R-Surprise) has reached an agreement with the Governor to get his vote to refer a sales tax hike to the November ballot (the reason why this was already a bad deal before Harper became the critical vote is summarized nicely in Rep. Daniel Patterson (D-Tucson)'s post right here.
The catch is that Harper will only vote for the referral if all state agencies cut 5% of their staff. No, that's not a 5% across the board budget cut, it's a 5% across the board staff cut. Of course these are agencies that have already eliminated unnecessary positions and gone along with state hiring freezes (remember those were implemented during the past few bad budget years) so what he means is that in order to get his vote, he wants to see heads roll. He wants to watch them fire people-- and in every state agency, no matter how critical they are.
Only in the bizarre, twisted world of Arizona Republican politics would a demented creation like Harper be allowed to wield that kind of power.
But that's only the beginning of what he wants.
He also wants to screw over two of his GOP colleagues and kill a downtown redevelopment project in Tucson. The two Republican Senators from Tucson, Jonathan Paton and Al Melvin, are already on board the GOP budget. Some southern Arizona blogs are all over them about that now that Harper is pulling his stunt. But Paton and Melvin have apparently folded like a house of cards. All I can say to that is, join the club. My own Republican Senator, Sylvia "uranium mining can't be dangerous because the earth is 6000 years old" Allen, already voted for the June 4 budget (which is more or less being revived in this one) which will make devastating cuts to rural hospitals and likely force every single rural health clinic around here to close. Maybe Tom Chabin is right and the voters are getting what we deserve, but I don't think so. Republicans have been promising for years that they would cut taxes for the wealthy and cut budgets and shrink government, well guess what folks, it wasn't just rhetoric. I have confidence that the voters will fix this problem next year (but it will be rocky going until then.)
But the really ridiculous part of what Harper wants is a 50% cut to the Auditor General's Office. The Auditor General is a nonpartisan office which is tasked with making sure that all the funds (or what is left of them) that the state provides to local governments, school districts and other entities are accounted for and spent responsibly. So apparently Sen. Harper is OK with more waste, fraud, mismanagement and even embezzlement of public funds because these are the things that the office of the Auditor General is supposed to prevent and protect us taxpayers from.
I should also add that the Auditor General's office has consistently been recognized as one of the best run offices in the state (maybe there is something to be said for running a non-partisan office with professionals who stay focused on doing their job.) In fact, Bill Thomson, the Deputy Auditor General, was recently honored with the Administrator of the Year award, given by that well-known hotbed of radical ultra-liberalism, the BYU Marriott school of Business Management.
Which makes me wonder. Why would Senator Harper single out the Auditor General's office for a 50% cut? Is it because he wants there to be more waste and fraud in public funds so that someday in the future he can find an example and use it to advance his own sick agenda? Or is it perhaps something a bit closer to home-- he knows someone who is screwing the taxpayers personally by embezzling funds, and he wants to try and protect them from those nosy auditors?
The real crime is that the rest of the Republicans in the legislature will probably vote for this and the Governor will sign it.
UPDATE: This did NOT get voted on. Apparently other Republican legislators balked at the idea of blanket-firing thousands of state workers for no other reason than to get one vote in the state senate. A small victory for sanity.
The catch is that Harper will only vote for the referral if all state agencies cut 5% of their staff. No, that's not a 5% across the board budget cut, it's a 5% across the board staff cut. Of course these are agencies that have already eliminated unnecessary positions and gone along with state hiring freezes (remember those were implemented during the past few bad budget years) so what he means is that in order to get his vote, he wants to see heads roll. He wants to watch them fire people-- and in every state agency, no matter how critical they are.
Only in the bizarre, twisted world of Arizona Republican politics would a demented creation like Harper be allowed to wield that kind of power.
But that's only the beginning of what he wants.
He also wants to screw over two of his GOP colleagues and kill a downtown redevelopment project in Tucson. The two Republican Senators from Tucson, Jonathan Paton and Al Melvin, are already on board the GOP budget. Some southern Arizona blogs are all over them about that now that Harper is pulling his stunt. But Paton and Melvin have apparently folded like a house of cards. All I can say to that is, join the club. My own Republican Senator, Sylvia "uranium mining can't be dangerous because the earth is 6000 years old" Allen, already voted for the June 4 budget (which is more or less being revived in this one) which will make devastating cuts to rural hospitals and likely force every single rural health clinic around here to close. Maybe Tom Chabin is right and the voters are getting what we deserve, but I don't think so. Republicans have been promising for years that they would cut taxes for the wealthy and cut budgets and shrink government, well guess what folks, it wasn't just rhetoric. I have confidence that the voters will fix this problem next year (but it will be rocky going until then.)
But the really ridiculous part of what Harper wants is a 50% cut to the Auditor General's Office. The Auditor General is a nonpartisan office which is tasked with making sure that all the funds (or what is left of them) that the state provides to local governments, school districts and other entities are accounted for and spent responsibly. So apparently Sen. Harper is OK with more waste, fraud, mismanagement and even embezzlement of public funds because these are the things that the office of the Auditor General is supposed to prevent and protect us taxpayers from.
I should also add that the Auditor General's office has consistently been recognized as one of the best run offices in the state (maybe there is something to be said for running a non-partisan office with professionals who stay focused on doing their job.) In fact, Bill Thomson, the Deputy Auditor General, was recently honored with the Administrator of the Year award, given by that well-known hotbed of radical ultra-liberalism, the BYU Marriott school of Business Management.
Which makes me wonder. Why would Senator Harper single out the Auditor General's office for a 50% cut? Is it because he wants there to be more waste and fraud in public funds so that someday in the future he can find an example and use it to advance his own sick agenda? Or is it perhaps something a bit closer to home-- he knows someone who is screwing the taxpayers personally by embezzling funds, and he wants to try and protect them from those nosy auditors?
The real crime is that the rest of the Republicans in the legislature will probably vote for this and the Governor will sign it.
UPDATE: This did NOT get voted on. Apparently other Republican legislators balked at the idea of blanket-firing thousands of state workers for no other reason than to get one vote in the state senate. A small victory for sanity.
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
For Governor Brewer to have any credibility at all, she has to veto this budget
The Republican legislature has apparently passed a budget package that is little changed from the package they passed on June 4 (and held all month) and that Governor Brewer even went to court to force them to send her so she could go ahead with a promised veto.
Since this budget is the same in all its major components to that budget and they didn't give her any of what she asked for in her five point plan (most notably a vote on a sales tax) I believe that she essentially has two choices.
She can sign the bill, and make it plain to everyone that she is a weak Governor who has been rolled by the hoods who run the legislature.
Or she can veto the bill, make it clear that she meant what she said last month, and then sit down with a clean table and negotiate with both Republicans and Democrats who are more interested in getting a budget that recognizes the hard economic realities of this year but won't devastate state schools, universities and services either this year or going forward into the future.
We will know probably within hours what she's really made of.
UPDATE:
She DID veto almost all of it! She signed essentially the minimum amount of the budget that she needed to in order to keep the government running.
Not that I completely trust Jan Brewer (who is still, at the end of the day, a conservative Republican) to always do the best job for the state, and she certainly deserves criticism for not showing more leadership in the months leading up to this debacle, but she deserves credit where credit is due and today she stepped up and did what had to be done.
OBSERVATION: The legislative leadership couldn't keep their members in line to put together the deal with the Governor that she wanted. So it is unlikely she will get anywhere just re-negotiating with them, instead she may have more success if she sits down with Democrats and moderate Republicans and tries to put together a majority that way.
Since this budget is the same in all its major components to that budget and they didn't give her any of what she asked for in her five point plan (most notably a vote on a sales tax) I believe that she essentially has two choices.
She can sign the bill, and make it plain to everyone that she is a weak Governor who has been rolled by the hoods who run the legislature.
Or she can veto the bill, make it clear that she meant what she said last month, and then sit down with a clean table and negotiate with both Republicans and Democrats who are more interested in getting a budget that recognizes the hard economic realities of this year but won't devastate state schools, universities and services either this year or going forward into the future.
We will know probably within hours what she's really made of.
UPDATE:
She DID veto almost all of it! She signed essentially the minimum amount of the budget that she needed to in order to keep the government running.
Not that I completely trust Jan Brewer (who is still, at the end of the day, a conservative Republican) to always do the best job for the state, and she certainly deserves criticism for not showing more leadership in the months leading up to this debacle, but she deserves credit where credit is due and today she stepped up and did what had to be done.
OBSERVATION: The legislative leadership couldn't keep their members in line to put together the deal with the Governor that she wanted. So it is unlikely she will get anywhere just re-negotiating with them, instead she may have more success if she sits down with Democrats and moderate Republicans and tries to put together a majority that way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
