Contact: Marsha Richards, Communications Director
(360) 956-3482
Governor, budget team outline innovative solution
to state deficit
Governor Gary Locke and his budget director, Marty Brown, have come up
with an innovative and exciting approach to solving Washington's budget
deficit. Old thinking says the state must approach budgeting with two options:
raise taxes or cut services (or some combination of both). But Locke and
Brown have outlined a third option that bases the state's future spending
on estimated revenue, clearly defined goals and measurable outcomes.
The governor's Office of Financial Management (OFM) has answered four key
questions:
1. How much money does the state have?
2. What does the state want to accomplish?
3. What is the most effective way to accomplish the state's goals with the
money available?
4. How will the state measure its progress in meeting those goals?
"We're asking these questions from a fundamentally different perspective
than before," said Locke at a Seattle Chamber meeting last month. "Rather
than just assume historical funding levels for existing programs, based
on legislative tradition, our premise is that our budget must be based on
desired outcomes."
Three cheers!
OFM's model will revolutionize state spending and take necessary steps
toward assuring accountability to taxpayers. It will identify, simply and
clearly, what the state plans to accomplish and how it will pay for the
services. Then it will measure the state's progress toward those goals.
EFF is now calling on the governor to encourage both parties in the state
legislature to appoint four representatives from each caucus to work with
OFM. These representatives and the governor's budget team can then develop
a resolution identifying the core functions of the state and creating a
plan to achieve those functions. The new budget should be built to achieve
that plan.
The budget is the most important piece of legislation lawmakers will pass
next year. They must be actively involved in the budget process. Thanks
to the efforts of the governor and OFM, they will now have the tools necessary
to achieve the state's goals efficiently and effectively.
At a March 23, 2005, House Appropriations hearing on a bill to gut the voter-approved I-601 spending limit, Rep. Jim McIntire (D) asked a supporter of I-601’s two-third supermajority requirement for the legislature to raise taxes the following question:
"Can you name a time when we [legislators] have actually not just set it [supermajority requirement] aside by majority vote? I mean, this is in many respects a procedural motion that has no bearing. It’s a statutory constraint that cannot constrain any legislature that chooses as a majority to set it aside . . . have we ever used a supermajority [to raise taxes]?"