EFF's Election Report ·
Gonzales Letter ·
Welfare Reform ·
Boeing Contract ·
Budget & Taxes ·
Business Climate ·
K-12 Fact Sheet ·
EFF Health Study ·
Paycheck Protection ·
Transportation ·
Unemployment Ins. ·
Receive Updates ·
Bookmark EFF ·
Contribute ·
EFF in the News ·
How Can I Help? ·
Join EFF ·
Media Center ·
PRESS RELEASE
 February 26, 2002
Murphy's Law: violations of Budget and Accounting Act or securities fraud The Office of Financial Management’s response to EFF’s recent charges of lawbreaking by Governor Locke and State Treasurer Murphy has been flippant. But according to Murphy’s own office, he and the governor are either violating the Budget and Accounting Act or there is a serious case of securities fraud. They can’t have it both ways. Here is a direct quote from the Official Statement State of Washington General Obligation Bonds, published by the State Treasurer January 15, 2002. (This publication is sent to current and prospective bond-holders to illustrate why the state is a good investment.) "State law requires a balanced budget. If at any time during the fiscal period the Governor projects a cash deficit because disbursements will exceed the aggregate of estimated receipts plus beginning cash surplus, the Governor is required to make across-the-board reductions in allotments in order to prevent a cash deficit, thereby reducing expenditures of appropriated funds, unless the legislature has directed the liquidation of the cash deficit over one or more fiscal periods. Across-the-board reductions occur only in those funds estimated to have a cash deficit. For example, if the General Fund-state were projected to have a deficit, the portion of an agency’s budget provided by the General Fund-state would be subject to reduction." (pg. A-8) The Office of Financial Management’s response to EFF’s recent charges of lawbreaking by Governor Locke and State Treasurer Murphy has been flippant. But according to Murphy’s own office, he and the governor are either violating the Budget and Accounting Act or there is a serious case of securities fraud. They can’t have it both ways. Here is a direct quote from the Official Statement State of Washington General Obligation Bonds, published by the State Treasurer January 15, 2002. (This publication is sent to current and prospective bond-holders to illustrate why the state is a good investment.) "State law requires a balanced budget. If at any time during the fiscal period the Governor projects a cash deficit because disbursements will exceed the aggregate of estimated receipts plus beginning cash surplus, the Governor is required to make across-the-board reductions in allotments in order to prevent a cash deficit, thereby reducing expenditures of appropriated funds, unless the legislature has directed the liquidation of the cash deficit over one or more fiscal periods. Across-the-board reductions occur only in those funds estimated to have a cash deficit. For example, if the General Fund-state were projected to have a deficit, the portion of an agency’s budget provided by the General Fund-state would be subject to reduction." (pg. A-8) To view a copy of EFF's press packet Contact: Jason Mercier, Deputy Communications Director, (360) 956-3482
|
1 Part Honesty; 2 Parts Arrogance 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]?" - Rep. Jim McIntire (D - 46) Despite the arrogance of some state officials, Washington's constitution is clear: "All political power is inherent in the people..." |
