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 ·
|
STEWARDSHIP SERIES June 2003 The Stewardship Project In 2003, many states experienced financial bow waves from previous years’ spending commitments coupled with an economic recession. Large deficits are the result in most states. Most short-term fixes have been exhausted. So what happens in the next budget? Some say we must cut spending; others say we must raise taxes; most say a combination of the two will be necessary. We believe a third way exists, as exemplified by our governor’s innovative Priorities of Government (POG) model. Governor Locke used POG as an objective process to begin determining what he believed to be state government’s core functions and his budget office prioritized spending proposals accordingly. This allowed him to close a $2.6 billion budget gap without raising general taxes. We don’t agree with all of the governor's ten priorities, and likely you won’t either, but it provides a practical and concrete place to begin the debate. We believe it is imperative to involve the public and the legislature in determining these priorities. To help with the process of building state budgets around a defined set of core governing functions, we updated our Stewardship Series. It asks and helps answer these questions: What is the role of government? What are the essential services government must provide to fulfill its purpose? How will we know if government is doing a good job? What should all of this cost? How will budget cuts be properly prioritized? Click here for the entire publication in one PDF. Or click on the links below to view the Stewardship Series by chapter: Section 1: Determining Core Functions Section 2: Priorities of Government Section 3: Success Stories from the Experts Section 4: Specific Policy Considerations
Say
So Long to State Budget Deficits National
Stewardship Project
|
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..." |
