This page was last updated on June 19, 2011.
Balnce [sic] the budget wisely; Jill Marsilio-Colonna, Executive Director – Women’s Center of Beaver County; Beaver County Times; June 19, 2011.
Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.
“State leaders must choose wisely where to spend and where to cut to balance this year’s budget.”
[RWC] This letter is mostly a list of standard talking points with no backup. Therefore, I suggest you verify the assertions in which you have an interest.
“The state House has approved a budget plan that includes very real, and very deep, cuts to education and human services.”
[RWC] Health & human services consumes 43.5% of the General Fund (GF) budget while education spending comes in a close second at 38.9% of the GF budget. Simple addition (82.4%) tells us no other category even comes close to these two. “Protection of Persons and Property” comes in a distant third at only 11.2%. If we can’t reduce the big ticket items, we can’t reduce the deficit without making things worse down the road. The idea taxing gas extraction, as Ms. Marsilio-Colonna lobbies for below, would have any material effect on the “education and human services” cuts is misleading at best. Also, as a state we’re not in a good position tax-wise and adding another tax would make a bad situation worse.
“This budget would end health insurance for our working poor, hamper child abuse protection efforts and limit help for domestic and sexual violence victims. Slashing funding for homeless shelters means more people on the street needing even more expensive services.
“Cutting job training now leads to higher unemployment later. Cutting early childhood education means paying even more later for special education.
“Many of these cuts could be prevented without raising taxes on middle-class families.”
[RWC] Ms. Marsilio-Colonna ignores the fact “middle-class families” would pay the “drilling tax” she proposes below via their natural gas bills and how much they pay for products and services that use natural gas. Even the BCT finally conceded an extraction tax is “a tax that is paid by consumers.”
“The state is projecting a $539 million revenue surplus. We should use it to provide vital services that are needed now.”
[RWC] From what I read, the “$539 million revenue surplus” is an unexpected surplus from this fiscal year, not from the upcoming fiscal year (2011-2012) with a projected pre-budget deficit of about $4.1 billion. I believe the last time we spent “found money” for recurring spending was in 2001 when then-Gov. Tom Ridge (R) and the Republican-majority General Assembly used it to increase state pensions. I don’t know if it’s true or not, but I’d like to think Gov. Tom Corbett (R) and other Republicans learned from that blunder. Why not use most or the entire surplus to pay down some state debt, thereby reducing ongoing interest expense in the budget?
“Pennsylvania is the only major gas-producing state in the nation that doesn’t have a drilling tax. We should tax natural gas producers.”
[RWC] This reminds me of a question many of us heard as kids, “If your friends jumped off a bridge, would you jump too?” As I wrote in previous critiques, “natural gas producers” pay taxes just as any other business. What PA doesn’t yet do is charge a royalty for extracted gas, a charge the BCT finally conceded is “a tax that is paid by consumers.” In any case, using BCT figures, tax revenue, regardless of who paid it, would only address about 6.2% of the projected deficit and would be less than 1% of the General Fund (GF) budget.
“Balancing the budget on the backs of hard-working families and vulnerable people shouldn’t be an option.”
[RWC] Aren’t the vast majority of families “hard-working families?” If our budgets can’t be balanced “on the backs of” the vast majority of us, who will pay?
There is nothing compassionate about the government taking from one family’s paycheck to give to someone who didn’t earn it. There is nothing altruistic or charitable about telling government to rob from Peter to pay Paul. Compassion is when a person freely chooses to use his own paycheck to help someone in need.
Do I believe people who need help because of circumstances beyond their control should get it? Of course, but via private charities funded by voluntary contributions.
© 2004-2011 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.