Sunday, Apr. 13, 2008

Lawmakers can’t keep avoiding tough budget calls

WHEN YOU CAN’T afford enough prison guards to keep the peace and prevent escapes, can’t afford enough mental health services to keep from clogging up our emergency rooms, can’t afford to provide 4-year-old kindergarten to all the poor kids who will otherwise start school so far behind they’ll never catch up, can’t afford to invest in economic development or plug the potholes or widen congested roads, one of two things is going on: Either your priorities are out of whack, or else you simply aren’t spending enough money.

Last week, budget writers faced tough choices when revenue projections suddenly plunged by $180 million:

• Do you furlough state employees, or eliminate the 2 percent pay raise you had planned to give them?

• Eliminate funding for new school buses or for 4-year-old kindergarten?

• Cut back your commitment to the endowed chairs program, or cut more of the cushion out of Medicaid?

At least on the first two, the Senate Finance Committee chose the less-bad option — sacrificing pay raises rather than employees, school buses rather than 4K.

But those weren’t really the only options available.

The $130 million that the committee had to cut on Tuesday constituted just 1.8 percent of the $7.1 billion state budget; even if you count the entire $180 million reduction ($50 million of which the panel had already anticipated, and left out), that’s still just 2.5 percent.

The problem is that senators were really only considering the $327 million — now slashed to $147 million — in what they call “new money.”

The other $6.7 billion — the so-called “base budget” — wasn’t up for debate. What that means is that nearly everything the state is now doing is automatically deemed more important than any of the new things we might do — and that has been the case every year, as far back as the eye can see. So, for example, continuing to lock away nonviolent, first-time offenders at a cost of $15,000 a year each is more important than providing high-quality 4K programs to all the poor kids in the state, rather than just a few, so that maybe they’ll make something of themselves and stay out of prison.

Also not up for debate were all the pots of money the Legislature and state agencies have squirreled away. Oh, the Department of Health and Human Services’ stash was fair game, and the Finance Committee budget taps it for $96 million (the House snatched $105 million). So was the money that’s supposed to pay to clean up our low-level nuclear landfill at Barnwell. But that $18 million that’s sitting in an account over at the Budget and Control Board to pay for the Legislature’s slush fund (the ironically named “Competitive Grants” program) — that’s off limits.

It makes no sense to hang onto $18 million to fund parades and festivals while cutting the endowed chairs program that is helping to transform our economy.

Finally, not up for discussion is the $220 million the Legislature “spent” — actually, decided to do without — last year when it passed the biggest tax cut in state history. Or any of the other tax cuts lawmakers have piled atop each other in recent years.

We’re not saying that the Legislature has to raise taxes. We’re saying, again, that legislators must either eliminate entire programs and agencies they deem expendable — rather than slowly bleeding programs until they can serve no useful purpose — or else raise taxes. The choice is theirs. But they must choose.