Six-year budget outlook: $3.1 billion deficit or $380
million surplus?
Depending on how legislators approach budgeting over the next six yearsbeginning
with next years supplemental budgetWashington will face a potential
$3.1 billion deficit in 2009, or enjoy a $380 million surplus. The prediction
comes from a six-year budget forecast presented last Friday by the Senate Ways
and Means committee.
The forecast notes that state revenues are expected to continue increasing.
Assuming legislators adhere to I-601 spending limits and follow the principles
outlined in Governor Lockes new priority-based budget model, revenues
will exceed expenditures by $380 million in 2009. (The estimate allows for
continued funding of I-728 and the states proposed tax incentives for
Boeing and the hi-tech industry.)
This means legislators must begin the budget process by defining the results
they want, then decide which programs and services to purchase with available
revenue to best achieve those results. This ensures a balanced budget.
On the other hand, if lawmakers begin budgeting with the assumption that
they must continue funding all current programs, adjusting for caseload increases,
they will have a massive deficit.
Legislators will face their first test next session when they develop a supplemental
budget. The Ways and Means committee is projecting additional spending needs
of $197 million. The trick will be to prioritize spending and offset increases
in one area with decreases in another, maintaining a revenue-neutral budget
and preserving the states emergency reserves. This will require reviewing
all state programs and activities to determine how effectively they are meeting
the states highest priorities. The questions legislators must answer
are:
How much money does the state have?
What does the state want to accomplish?
What is the most effective way to accomplish the states goals with
the money available?
How will the state measure its progress in meeting those goals?
It is also important to note that despite the progress made this year with
priority-based budgeting, the state is still planning to spend $149 million
more than it expects to collect this budget cycle. This shortfall should not
be patched with one-time reserves.
Developing the supplemental budget will provide legislators with an opportunity
to show they can stay committed to results. Their choices will determine whether
Washingtonians face deficits and tax increases or enjoy budget discipline and
surpluses.
Six-year forecast (Dollars in millions) Numbers updated by Senate Ways and Means 12/10/03
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
“Baseline” expenditures
$11,270
$11,700
$12,037
$12,369
$12,725
$13,099
“Baseline” revenues
$11,170
$11,626
$12,207
$12,818
$13,458
$14,131
Select policy
add-ons
$75
$150
$513
$770
$1,198
$1,538
Total expenditures
$11,345
$11,850
$12,550
$13,139
$13,923
$14,637
Total revenues*
$11,759
$11,990
$12,100
$12,049
$11,891
$11,571
Ending balance
$414
$140
<$450>
<$1,090>
<$2,032>
<$3,066
*Assumes continued funding of I-728, Boeing and Hi-tech
tax incentives, reserves and any carry-forward deficits.
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
I-601 spending limit
$11,345
$11,850
$12,160
$12,489
$12,839
$13,223
Revenues*
$11,347
$11,576
$11,960
$12,499
$12,980
$13,603
Revenues over 601 limit
$2
<$274>
<$200>
$10
$141
$380
*Assumes continued funding of I-728, Boeing and Hi-tech
tax incentives, and excludes reserves or carry-forward deficits from overspending
I-601 limit.
Prepared by Jason Mercier | Budget Research Analyst
Contact: Jason
Mercier | Budget Researsh Analyst | 360.956.3482
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]?"