Jason Mercier | Evergreen
Freedom Foundation Next February, Oregonians will likely have the opportunity
to repeal the Legislature's recent $1.1 billion tax increase. With that
prospect looming, it would be best to prepare for voters repealing the increase,
rather than waiting until the dust actually settles. An ounce of budget
reform leadership is worth more than a pound of chaos.
As one example of what could be done now, let's look at how Washington
Governor Gary Locke (D) resolved a $2 billion budget shortfall earlier this
year. Locke realized that tax increases were politically unacceptable and
sought a different approach. He decided to frame the issue around an innovative
"Priorities of Government" budget model. While not a new idea,
it is a revolutionary one that says simply: Budgeting should be focused
on achieving clearly-defined results, not on maintaining the status quo
by blindly adjusting spending to include inflation and caseload increases.
To accomplish this, Governor Locke and his budget team identified 10 goals
for government and asked agencies to submit their budget requests based
on how effectively each of their programs would accomplish one of those
goals. In other words, they started by answering the question: What are
the state's top priorities and how can we best provide them with the money
available? This process enabled a bipartisan Washington budget to be adopted
and balanced without general tax increases.
Governor Kulongoski and legislators already have the tools available to
craft a similar priority-based budget in Oregon that will resolve the state's
fiscal problems. The question is, will lawmakers decide to use these tools
or continue to ignore them?
The real problem with Oregon's budget is that it is not tied to the state's
benchmarks or performance measures.
Even Governor Kulongoski's priorities for the state are not clearly articulated
in the budget.
Consider the Oregon Progress Board's criticism of the governor's number
one priority, which reads in its entirety "Children": "There
is no official, single articulation of priorities within Oregon state government
for child well being. Child well being, generally, is a priority for Governor
Kulongoski. A specific set of priorities within the child well being topic
has not been articulated by his Administration."
This is a problem, however it can be addressed -- not only for "Children,"
but for all the state's programs. Doing so would allow Oregon to adopt a
responsible, balanced budget that is not dependent on tax increases.
For meaningful reform, Oregon legislators need to determine the state's
core functions and use the existing budget tools to filter out unnecessary
programs. They should also take existing agency mission statements and agency
goals, objectives and evaluation measures, and tie them directly to the
state budget.
In 1993 Cascade Policy Institute published the report Seven
Principles of State Budget Reform. The deja vu Executive Summary begins,
"Why is there another fiscal crisis in Oregon? In a state budget dominated
by discussions of specific programs, there is little discussion of broad
principles for responding to Oregon's budget squeeze."
The principles outlined in this report could serve as a starting point
for identifying Oregon state government's core functions.
Why is determining core functions so important to solving the state's budget
problem?
Quite simply, core functions define the role of government. Without understanding
and defining the priorities of government, expenditures can't be justified.
It doesn't matter if the state is efficient in delivering a particular service
if government shouldn't be providing the service in the first place.
Though agencies may fight such a review, it must be done for the health
of Oregon's economy, let alone the state budget. Only by carefully considering
the proper role of government can state officials do a good job protecting
individual rights while providing essential services to taxpayers in an
efficient, cost-effective manner. Regardless of what agencies may say during
this review, this is not an "anti-government" philosophy; rather
it is ensuring that what government is supposed to do, it will do well.
By engaging in real and meaningful budget reform, lawmakers will finally
be able to prove to Oregonians that their government is truly accountable
and is demonstrating measurable results.
Oregonians deserve nothing less.
Jason Mercier is a budget research analyst for the Olympia-based Evergreen
Freedom Foundation, a nonprofit public policy research organization dedicated
to individual liberty, free enterprise and accountable government.
Contact: Jason Mercier | Budget
Research 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]?"