Good Idea In Salem: Dems Will Kill It

People who get their checks from the government will be against it.

In Oregon, that seems to be a lot of people. So, while a good idea--especially as Oregon seems to want to lead the nation in unemployment--it's going to get killed.

But, for your edification, here's the plan from the Party of No (Republican Party):

Republicans propose budget that protects core services without increasing taxes

Back to Basics Budget lets service areas replay 2007-09 funding levels

Salem, OR – House and Senate Republicans announced a Back to Basics Budget plan on Tuesday. The plan funds a full school year, protects prioritized service areas like public safety and human services by giving them the same funding levels they received in the last two year budget and creates a $1.374 billion surplus for targeted legislative add-backs and contingency reserves.

“This budget protects our most important priorities: quality education for our kids, safe neighborhoods and services for the most needy and vulnerable,” said Senator Chris Telfer (R-Bend). “Republicans applied the same philosophy that Oregon families and small businesses are applying to their budgets, funding what is most important with what we have, tightening our belt and being fiscally responsible. If we do those things, we don’t have to talk about raising taxes on Oregon families and small businesses in these tough times.”

Highlights of the Back to Basics Budget include:

The plan starts with the assumption that Oregon government does not need to increase taxes in order to provide the services that Oregonians need and value.

The plan funds K-12 education with $6.245 billion, holding schools harmless with a zero cuts budget that ensures kids can receive a quality education through a full school year.

The plan protects public safety, human services and other core functions by giving them at a minimum the exact budget they had last cycle.

The plan leaves a $1.374 billion surplus for legislative add backs, enhancements, contingencies and reserves.

The plan leaves $457 million of our state reserves intact.

Republicans built the Back to Basics Budget using a philosophy that funds the most important, core services first. This budget creates a starting point that holds services like K-12 education, higher education, public safety agencies and human services providers harmless from any cuts from their 2007-09 funding levels.

To protect these priorities, the budget uses $911 million in Federal Stimulus money and $457 million from the Rainy Day and Education Stability Funds, leaving $457 million left in reserves. The budget also uses $429 million in savings and efficiency enhancements. After funding each core service at their 2007-09 level, the budget leaves $1.374 billion for the legislature to make targeted add-backs to the most important priorities.

“The way Oregon budgets must be fixed,” said Senator Frank Morse (R-Morse). “Past practices are simply not sustainable. Government must find ways to improve performance and demonstrate the ability to reduce costs. Ultimately, core services and functions of government can be preserved without raising taxes. ”

In the past, the legislature has started the budget discussion with an automatic, no-questions-asked increase to state agencies, called the “Essential Budget Level.” The legislature doesn’t require agencies to come before the budget writing committee and justify why they need increases in their base levels of spending like a business would. The Legislature has handed out increases without asking tough questions about what drives the cost of state government and how we can better prioritize. The result is out-of-control spending and insurmountable deficits. In fact, over the last ten years our state budget has increased by more than 75%.

“This is a fundamental change to the way the legislature budgets,” said Representative Bruce Hanna (R-Roseburg). “Oregonians are hurting and having to make tough choices in their budgets at home and in their businesses right now. We think Oregon government should be making the same tough decisions and start managing taxpayer dollars with responsibility.”

So, the Party of No has come up with a budget proposal that makes sense. The State can afford it. It recognizes that the growth of government has been uncontrolled (unsustainable).

Too bad your state representatives, Witt, Boone and Johnson, will vote against it. But, that's who you elected.

Have a nice day.

UPDATE: (Click on pic at bottom for larger image.)

One comment has been posted so far. Posted "anonymously." But it's interesting to note that the comment came from Salem, on the state's domain server. So it's probably safe to assume that it is either an employee of the state, or perhaps the friend or family of an employee that had access to the state's internet server.

My question is, does this cross the line into Sock Puppetry? Is this an example of "getting turfed"?

Readers of NW Republican may be aware of the the "Moonbat Rule Book" posted on the right sidebar of that site. I am, happily, the author of Rule 10. That is, it has been my experience that the Left is unaccustomed to arguing in good faith. In my book, calling someone a liar in the first sentence of any argument. People that can't argue without calling others names find themselves unable to comment here. For those who speak fluent Moonbatese, it is sufficient unto the day to find that Republicans have again lied. They are free to move on.

Examining the content of the comment, one is impressed with a blizzard of numbers. And the impecunious manner that these numbers are introduced to the reader. First under the commentor's knife? The base point for the Republican plan.

The plan under discussion was put together following the assumptions of the state economist in his April report of March numbers. (The new report is due out this Friday. I wrote about this here.)

So to argue against a plan based on the current "official" revenue expectations report is prolly not consistent with the comment author's predicate that the Republican plan "is not an honest effort." You can't have it both ways. If you suppress the truth to make a point, the sin may not be mortal. But it is venal.

Then another blizzard of words. If I were a young man working for a less than gifted state legislator, I know that I could comfort her with these words. I'd even write them down so that she could read them. Point being, if we "lose" $512-million in federal "stimulus" money so that we fail to further increase the size of our state's welfare system, I will not be disappointed. The Left sees these funds as a blessing. I see them as a curse. But "sustainability" is a word used to criticize fossil fuels, not government spending. We are, alas, worlds apart.

Finally, the issue of unspent budgeted funds. Taking funds that have been allocated and remain unspent, returning those funds to the General Fund makes sense. Our dear anonymous Salem commentor fails to share the way these funds will be recaptured. But that's not the point for our dear commentor.

The point is, budget issues in Salem are wierd, arcane and at times, simply opaque. And the commentor relies upon the Byzantine budget system to occlude from our view from the simple question, "where are the dollars, do we need to keep them there and can we use those dollars to provide the services that a State must provide?"

The the ballyhoo of the street huckster offering you a chance to double your money in a game of Three Card Monte, the conclusion of this commentor reeks of the conman. I'm reminded of an old saying a former econ prof shared with me: "If you can dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit."