[Winona Online Democracy]

Hello  All,

If you have a chance to read far enough back in the Star Tribune, some good
stories appear about the budget.  Here is the paper's editorial and a story
from two days ago.

The two pieces point out important parts of this budget puzzle.

One of the most interesting sections that the second article points out is,

"This is the largest budget in state history," he [Pawlenty] said, noting that a
number of the rollbacks are not actual cuts, but reductions in projected
growth. However, almost every biennial budget for the past two decades was
at the time the largest ever. And Pawlenty's proposal provides the smallest
increase in at least 20 years, barely enough to account for population
increase and inflation."

Not to mention the shell game when the Governor talks about more money for
schools.  The State took over a bigger chunck of the school funding two
years ago, it's not more money, it's just coming from the state instead of
the local levels.

Such the political spin goes.

I hope the media does a lot more of this.

I'm not saying the sky is falling but I'm not too chicken to get involved
in the  political discussion about the realities of these huge changes in
our quality of life.

F.Y.I.

Dwayne

================

Star Tribune

Editorial: Pawlenty budget / The pain isn't widely shared

Published Feb. 19, 2003
=================

After telling Minnesotans for weeks that he was grappling with the
Incredible Hulk of state budget deficits, Gov. Tim Pawlenty produced a
surprise Tuesday for some Minnesotans: no pain. If you're a middle-or
upper-income earner, living in a city that receives little state aid (that
would be a suburb), not sending a child to a public college, not much of
transit or state parks user -- then Pawlenty has a deal for you. His budget
would let you skate through the state's deficit valley pretty much
unscathed.

Unless, of course, you happen to be a public employee. Then the governor
wants you to forgo a wage increase for two years (which, depending on your
age, could be a hit that keeps on hitting you in retirement). Better not
lose your health insurance. Eligibility for MinnesotaCare would shrink
under Pawlenty's plan. Better start saving now if you expect your kids to
go to the University of Minnesota or a MnSCU school. The governor's plan
keeps tuition climbing fast.

Pawlenty has cleverly concentrated his budget-balancing plan's impact into
three categories -- public employee compensation, higher education and
state-supported health care and human services -- and two geographic zones,
outstate Minnesota and the core cities. He asks those sectors to do much of
the heavy lifting that's required to plug a forecasted $4.5 billion hole in
the state's
fiscal 2004-05 budget.

Does that square with Minnesota's standard of fairness? That is the
question that will dominate the balance of the 2003 legislative session.

The answer should be informed by history -- some of which Pawlenty
selectively cited yesterday. He noted that the state's budget trouble was
triggered by the burst of an economic bubble that looked deceptively solid
four years ago. He acknowledged that, as a legislator, he was among those
who thought prosperity would last, and based a permanent tax cut on that
presumption.

The presumption proved wrong. But the governor rejects any suggestion that
those tax cuts were misguided. Rather, having sold tax cuts on a claim that
they could be made without cutting services, Pawlenty now argues that
public services should be made to match downsized revenues -- and that the
squeeze should largely spare the Minnesotans who gained the most from the
tax cuts.

Previous generations facing similar challenges have made different
judgments about fairness. In 1933, when states all around Minnesota were
opting for regressive sales taxes, Gov. Floyd B. Olson led Minnesota to
enact an income tax based on ability to pay. In 1982, after cutting
spending, the state imposed a temporary income-tax surcharge so that
middle-and upper-income Minnesotans contributed to the solution.

Pawlenty's budget has a number of strengths. It includes several creative
administrative consolidations and inducements for efficiency. It strives to
adequately fund student financial aid and discourage teacher layoffs. It
takes pains to spare any city from double-digit revenue cuts in any given
year. It wisely reestablishes the state's drained $500 million reserve
fund.

Those are things that legislators ought to value in a budget plan -- but so
is fairness. Minnesota government is not of, by and for public employees or
the poor. It belongs to every Minnesotan, and making it fiscally sound
again is every Minnesotan's task.


=================

Star Tribune

Article: "Pawlenty spreads pain to cut deficit"

Patricia Lopez and Dane Smith

Published Feb. 19, 2003

==========================


City governments would lose about a fourth of their state funding, and
counties nearly as much.  Wages would be frozen for two years for more than
300,000 public employees. Colleges and universities would see unprecedented
funding reductions. And access to subsidized health care would be reduced
for thousands of Minnesotans.

Those are the major elements of a proposal that Gov. Tim Pawlenty announced
Tuesday to wipe out a $4.2 billion projected deficit during the next two
years, without raising taxes.

Pawlenty described the moment as a pivotal point in Minnesota history,
borrowing a phrase from President John Kennedy and saying Minnesota "faces
a New Frontier" of competitive pressures and a slower-growing government.

But that likely means that bus fares would go up and service would go down.
Camping fees for state parks would rise, and half of the convicts at state
prisons in Stillwater and St. Cloud would double-bunk. The state's health
care plan for low-income childless adults would disappear.

The Pawlenty proposal, which now begins its journey through the legislative
process,
would protect K-12 classrooms and give schools an increase of about $300
million over two years.

Aside from schools and overall spending on health and human services,
however, most every other part of stategovernment would experience
double-digit-percentage reductions in their budgets.

Transportation would see a general fund cut of 64 percent, though a lot of
that reduction is related to a previous one-time infusion of cash to move
some road projects ahead. Much of transportation's funding comes from other
sources, including the federal government. Even so, its overall funding
would drop 11 percent. Every state agency would see a 15 percent drop.

Pawlenty, who called the state's fiscal crisis "a brain-buster" that has
him worried from the moment he wakes up, said the proposals "will impact
many Minnesotans, including me."

Reaction to the Republican governor's plan varied wildly, from enthusiastic
embraces by business leaders and conservative interest groups to harsh
denunciations from affected agencies, DFL legislative leaders and liberal
interest groups.

In an unusually sharp response from the judicial branch, Supreme Court
Chief Justice Kathleen Blatz said in a statement Tuesday night that
proposed cuts to the courts might necessitate the layoff of 800 employees
and compromise fair and speedy trials. "This is unacceptable," she said.

In his presentation, Pawlenty took great pains to note that as tough as
parts of his budget might appear, the overall proposal actually would
increase spending by $1 billion over two years -- a 3.8 percent rise from
the current two-year budget period to the 2004-05 fiscal years.

==========

"This is the largest budget in state history," he said, noting that a
number of the rollbacks are not actual cuts, but reductions in projected
growth. However, almost every biennial budget for the past two decades was
at the time the largest ever. And Pawlenty's proposal provides the smallest
increase in at least 20 years, barely enough to account for population
increase and inflation.

===========

Projected spending before the Pawlenty proposal, based on programs in
current law, had been estimated at about $5 billion more for the next
budget period. These projected increases were driven by factors ranging
from more kids in schools to rising health care costs to the basic
increases in wages and benefits that are negotiated routinely.

===========

Those spending demands were easy to accommodate during the revenue
surpluses and economic boom of the 1990s, which Pawlenty called a "mirage."
But now, he said, "the math doesn't work."

In previous downturns, governors in all parties typically have used tax
increases as part of the solution. But Pawlenty, who sold himself to his
party as a strong conservative, pledged no increase in taxes.

DFLers bearish

DFL legislative leaders panned the proposal as bad for Minnesota's quality
of life and a violation of Pawlenty's promise not to raise taxes, namely
local governments' property taxes. They also promoted their plans for a
statewide series of hearings on the budget and encouraged affected citizens
to show up and speak out.

However, DFLers so far have avoided advancing even a sketchy plan for their
own
budget-balancing, and they refuse to say whether or which tax increases
they might support as an alternative to cuts. Pawlenty and Republicans, in
turn, have chided DFLers for complaining without offering alternatives.

"Republicans want to turn their back on the Minnesota Miracle [tax
increases in the 1970s that lowered property taxes and equalized revenues
for local governments and schools]," said Senate Assistant Majority Leader
Ann Rest, DFL-New Hope. "[These are] the very things that made us number
one in liveability."

House Minority Leader Matt Entenza, DFL-St. Paul, said the budget proposal
amounts to at least three broken campaign promises by Republicans and
Pawlenty.

"He said he wouldn't raise taxes, and there's a mammoth increase in
property taxes. He said he'd protect public safety, and cops and
firefighters will be cut. He said they'd protect the elderly in nursing
homes, and they are cutting nursing homes," Entenza said.

Finance Commissioner Dan McElroy and Pawlenty insisted that a combination
of levy limits and other spending disincentives they are proposing for
local governments would at least prevent large property tax increases.

Pawlenty said Minnesota's economy had been in a downturn for two years and
that cities and counties had yet to suffer aid cuts. "They haven't had one
fiscal hair on their heads touched," he said.

Republicans bullish

Pawlenty's Republican allies in the Legislature, who balked at his cuts in
ethanol subsidies when Pawlenty earlier this month tried to pare spending
in the current budget period, forcefully embraced his plan.

"House Republicans and the governor recognize that Joe and Jane Minnesota
are asking us to balance this budget without raising taxes," said House
Majority Leader Erik Paulsen, R-Eden Prairie. "DFLers are eyeing
Minnesotans as Joe Millionaire," he added, referring to DFL criticism of
the tax cuts and the advocacy by DFL interest groups for tax increases.

Some Republican leaders privately acknowledged that there might be serious
complaints from their members about the cuts in city and county aids,
especially in rural areas that depend on those subsidies far more heavily
than suburban communities.

Pawlenty's plan manages to avoid closing any outstate college campuses or
shutting down any other major institutions in rural Minnesota, noted state
Rep. Jim Knoblach, R-St. Cloud, chairman of the Ways and Means Committee.

Many Republicans expressed relief that the proposal seemed less severe than
it might have been.  ?It's better than we all expected by far. I'm very
optimistic. I think it can be done," said Senate Minority Leader Dick Day,
R-Owatonna.

No turning back

Pawlenty on Tuesday again made the case that despite its economic travails
-- indeed, because of them -- Minnesota could not turn to tax increases.
"The overwhelming majority of Minnesotans agree with me on that position,"
he said.

He noted that even if his budget were adopted wholesale, Minnesota would
remain "one of the highest-taxed, highest-spending states in the nation."

About two-thirds of Pawlenty's budget solution would come from reductions
in projected spending -- about $2.9 billion. The rest comes from accounting
shifts and use of off-budget special funds, such as the state's $1 billion
endowment created from its settlement with tobacco companies.

Use of accounting shifts is considered poor fiscal practice, and the
Pawlenty budget has upward of $600 million in such shifts, according to
Senate Finance Chairman Dick Cohen, DFL-St. Paul.  McElroy acknowledged
that it is not a preferred method.

"This budget wouldn't get an A-plus from Moody's," he said, referring to
one of the major New York bond houses. "But I think it would get a fairly
good grade."

Pawlenty emphasized that his plan also would begin to rebuild the state's
depleted budget reserves to $500 million by the end of the budget period --
crucial for maintaining the state's AAA bond rating.

Neither Pawlenty nor McElroy could offer any estimate of the total effect
of the public sector wage freeze, but the budget proposal presumes two
years of no-growth salaries. Without that, McElroy warned, "there will be
greater impacts on children and on services."

-- The writers are at [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED]

------------

Dwayne Voegeli

Winona County Commissioner, District #2

(507) 453-9012

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

870 44th Ave.
Winona, MN  55987

------------


_______________________________________________
This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit
http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
Any problems or suggestions can be directed to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to