About legislative sessions
Legislative sessions alternate between long (budget sessions) and short (supplemental budget) sessions. This year is a supplemental session. That is, the job of the legislature is primarily to "tweak" the already established state budget, working within the established fiscal commitment the state set last year. Historically, more bills are introduced during the regular budget sessions (the regular sessions are 100 days long, the supplemental sessions are 60 days long, BTW).
I've been covering the legislature for 8 years now, and this year's supplemental session is just plain goofy.
Last session, the Democratically-controlled legislature increased state spending by over $400 million. Shortly before the 2006 session began, the state announced a $1.45+ billion budget surplus (read - the state overtaxed the citizenry and wasn't going to give the money back).
Governor Christine Gregoire - who won a very close election against fiscally conservative Republican Dino Rossi two years ago - cautioned her Democratic colleagues against going overboard with spending and new programs (a criticism that WA Democrats have gained, but do not publicly admit to). In short, she said, "keep the spending in check, folks." With state spending at an all-time high, Gov. Gregoire's call to her fellow Democrats to reign-in their budgetary tendencies was both politically prudent and admirable.
The 2006 session - spending for the sake of spending
During the 2006 session - a short session meant merely to tweak the established budget - Democrats in the legislature have not apparently heeded the governor's warning... The number of bills the D's have proposed to fund new programs or increase fees and taxes is staggering (the list is way too long to include in one blog posting, I'll give you an opportunity to see them for yourself here and here). But it doesn't stop there.
Before the 2006 session got underway, Republicans in the legislature unveiled an 11-point platform of issues they want to accomplish. However, champions at the budget surplus bit in the same way the Democrats have, Republicans have introduced just as many bills as their more fiscally liberal counterparts (check out their efforts here and here).
It appears that each party has taken the strategy of "find the best ways to spend the surplus money before the other party does".
Radioguy's take on the session so far
Members of each party have introduced some fine pieces of legislation - increased penalties for sex offenders, benefits for spouses of law enforcement/fire fighters killed in the line of duty, cracking-down on "diploma mills", funding of local public works projects, penalizing the movement of oversized loads on state roadways during peak traffic hours, etc., etc. All are good bills, and are authored by lawmakers, from each party, who truly want to help the people of the state as best as they can.
Over the past few years, the state has faced ever-increasing expenses, and deferred paying the bills by shifting the fiscal responsibility for basic services on counties and by increasing taxes. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have told me over the years that the state is in bad shape, budget-wise. The state wants champagne, but thanks to all the programs it has, it can afford only lite beer.
If the state is not going to give back the money it overtaxed the people of the state (and the state never would), it shouldn't be spent on new anything... period. It should be put into the state's general fund to pay for programs already in place. Pay the bills, ya know. The legislature, sadly, is not looking at how to take care of existing responsibilities - it's all about new things for the future, which the state will have to pay for, again, in new taxes and increased fees.
Thanks, guys, you were really responsible this year.
No comments:
Post a Comment