Gregoire's budget goal is on target: stay within means

This editorial appears in the Yakima Herald-Republic on Dec. 21, 2008.

Gov. Chris Gregoire has set the tone with her state budget proposal to the Legislature: no new taxes, across-the-board spending cuts and a commitment to living within available revenue.

Now it's up to lawmakers to show the same kind of political courage when they convene Jan. 12 for a session in which they will write the final 2009-11 spending document. They will be under heavy pressure to break the governor's proposal because just about every special interest group with a stake in the budget is going to be pleading for mercy -- and more money.

The governor had barely finished announcing her budget Thursday before officials in various agencies and programs were predicting dire consequences. They're right that it is a tough budget and sacrifices will have to be made. But let's keep in mind that taxpayers are hurting, too. At least those who still have jobs.

There are things in the budget that, going in, we don't like either. One is a proposal to close Yakima Valley School in Selah. The facility houses severely developmentally disabled people, and closure would mean finding care somewhere else for the 88 residents.

Gregoire's budget proposal opens the door for more discussion on that.

Unlike the federal budget, the state budget must be balanced within existing revenues and not on credit. And in these tough economic times, the solution to a revenue shortfall to fund all the wish lists is not increased taxes to provide more money. The answer must be found in balancing the budget within existing revenues.

We offer this guideline for legislators who might consider going above the governor's suggested spending levels, or those who would ask them to:

If you want more for a given program, what other programs and services would you cut to provide the money?

Overall, the governor is proposing 2009-11 state general fund spending of $30.6 billion, compared to $29.4 billion in the current 2007-09 budget. So-called "near-general fund" spending will increase those totals to $33.5 billion and $33.2 billion, respectively. Those numbers are from the Office of Financial Management, the state's budget office.

Near-general fund money is dedicated for spending on specific things. Examples include the health services account funded by cigarette taxes and tobacco companies' settlement money, and a student achievement account, which receives cigarette and estate tax money to be spent on education.

Given that there's talk of a looming budget "deficit" of nearly $6 billion, the governor seems to have done a pretty good job of lining up spending with money available. But let's remember that "deficit" in this case is the amount of money projected to maintain current spending levels for another two years, with some adjustments for inflation, etc. It's a cut in the rate of increase in spending, not current spending levels.

In fact, the state will take in an estimated 5 percent more money in 2009-11 than it will in 2007-09, according to Washington Policy Center projections. And the think tank offers some serious food for thought by pointing out that in the 2003-05 and 2005-07 budgets, revenue increased 10.6 percent and 18.7 percent, respectively.

In other words, money was pouring in during those years and, unfortunately, it was almost all spent. That, in turn, helped create the high spending levels against which the "deficit" is now measured. It was a train wreck waiting to happen if a modest economic downturn hit. Instead, we got a big one.

Some legislators have talked about sending voters a tax package to help balance the budget, which one assumes means a budget that spends even more money. That kind of blank check budget writing is disingenuous at best. The voters wouldn't even have a crack at approving new taxes until November 2009, more than four months after the 2009-11 budget goes into effect July 1.

And if voters turned it down -- a pretty good bet the way things are now -- the 2010 Legislature would have to convene in January of that year and clean up the mess.

No, the answer is to tighten belts, spread the cuts around -- as the governor has done -- and balance the budget within existing projected revenues. Now, not later.

If there should be an economic uptick in the near future, lawmakers could easily restore some of the items being put on a spending diet.

Nobody said it was going to be easy. Gregoire has made that abundantly clear with her budget proposal, which she is required by law to submit to legislators before they meet starting Jan. 12.

In a telephone conference call with this newspaper's editorial board Friday, she again emphasized the state cannot tax its way out of this mess.

Gregoire's fellow Democrats control both the House and Senate and will be under heavy pressure from their party's constituent groups -- labor comes to mind -- to increase spending. Minority Republicans, which includes all of Central Washington's nine-member legislative delegation, will be hard pressed to stop any attempts to run over them.

This budget, however, must transcend partisan posturing and the stroking of special interest groups. It will require the kind of statesmanship and tough decisions that have to be in the public's best interests, measured against an ability to pay.

The governor's budget is one of three that will be involved in deliberations. The House and Senate will both have their own versions, and out of those three will come one that must be agreeable to all three parties.

But most of all, it has to be one that the public can afford.

Anything less is not acceptable.

* Members of the Yakima Herald-Republic editorial board are Michael Shepard, Barbara Serrano, Bill Lee and Karen Troianello.