$400 million federal bailout not invitation
for increased spending President Bush's new tax cut plan, approved last week by Congress, includes
billions of dollars in federal bailouts for the states. Washington stands
to gain $400 million, and special interests are already clamoring for handouts.
Many of our state legislators are approaching the funds cautiously, for
which we applaud them. For those who may view the bailout as an opportunity
to plan a spending spree, there are a few important things to remember:
1. This is one-time money.
If lawmakers use these one-time funds to increase spending, the state will
be facing a much larger problem ("bow wave") in the next budget
cycle. The new programs will still be around; the money won't. Spending
will outpace available revenue.
2. Current budget proposals already spend more than forecasted revenue.
The least expensive budget proposal being considered by the legislature
right now spends $350 million more than the state expects to collect in
2003-05. This is before the June 19 revenue forecast, where revenue predictions
are expected to drop. With current budget proposals already relying heavily
on reserves, draining them further to pay for ongoing programs won't be
an option in the 2005-07 budget.
3. Initiatives will create their own bow wave.
Some initiatives (home health care bargaining, cost-of-living increases
for teachers, and class size reduction) are either suspended or not fully
funded in 2003-05 budget proposals. If they are fully funded in the next
budget, the cost will result in a dramatic bow wave.
4. State employee collective bargaining contract has serious implications.
Legislators will be presented with the first collective bargaining proposal
by state employee unions in the 2005 session. Since the power to collectively
bargain is new, legislators should carefully analyze any proposal for its
long-term implications before making a decision.
5. There is no federal money tree.
We must not forget what the federal bailout amounts to: taxpayers from other
states being forced to pay for past mismanagement of Washington's budget.
Since the money is coming despite this fact, legislators should make sure
these dollars are used prudently. They should use them to rebuild the state's
emergency reserve, so the state will be prepared to weather the next economic
storm.
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]?"