budget reductions

[Carolyn Branagan]

Yesterday the Joint Fiscal Committee met at the statehouse and heard grim news from nearly everyone who testified.  Some difficult decisions are ahead of the legislature, as we prepare to not only cut an additional $36.85 million from the FY09 budget but also prepare the FY10 budget with less revenue than we had in 2006. Some programs will definitely be cut entirely.

One of the economists testifying, Tom Kavet, summed it up,” The magnitude of the expected revenue reductions is evident in one particularly bleak statistic:  Total Available General Fund revenues in FY10 are now projected to be slightly below revenues collected in FY06."   

Ed Paquin and I are friends and have been able to work well together on several issues in the past. I'll certainly be seeking his advice as we proceed. Revenue is expected to continue to decline through at least the third and fourth quarters of FY09. 
 
This is the most difficult financial problem government has experienced in a long time. My position will be that government needs to protect its citizens and provide for the most vulnerable: the very young...the very old...those who cannot provide for themselves.

These reductions in appropriations come to only about 5% of the total budget.  Overall the Vermont economy is very strong.  I'll continue to keep you informed as more information comes forth and decisions are made. Contact me at  cbranagan@leg.state.vt.us



Rep. Carolyn Branagan
Franklin-1, Fairfax/Georgia
Vermont House of Representatives

[j_gluck]

Carolyn,

I don't understand why it appears that the only option on the table is cutting the budget. Yes, there is a budget shortfall, but there are other options that aren't ever mentioned - by you, the Governor or most of the media. These options are:

• Cutting Expenses
• Increasing revenues
• Running a deficit - which our State Constitution allows

Jim Douglas seems to have no problem with the Federal government - using our tax dollars - to run a deficit and help Vermont's bottom line with an economic recovery plan. Can't we get more creative than to "cut an additional $36.85 million from the FY09 budget"?

Can't we have a discussion where all options are on the table? I've heard mentioned many times about how Governor Snelling met with the Democratic Speaker during a previous recession and worked out a plan to get the State's fiscal house in order. Where is Mr. Douglas' leadership in this area when we need it? Has he met - personally - with Shap Smith and Peter Shumlin? Are you willing to look at other ideas to deal with the shortfall if the Governor isn't?

[Mummy]

 

Just keep in mind how HAPPY you would be to find  $20 MILLION dollars in your checking account that you didn't know you had!  I see a $16 million dollar reduction not $36 million the way I do math!

[Chris Santee]

Keep cutting, send the $20M back to the people.
There's a lot of wasteful spending to cut.

As for Governor Douglas,

Appropriations Committee to Hold Full Committee Hearing on Economic Recovery Bill

WASHINGTON – On Thursday, December 11th, the House Appropriations Committee will hold a full committee hearing on the need for an economic recovery bill. 
Governors Jon Corzine (D-NJ), Jim Douglas (R-VT), and Jim Doyle (D-WI) will testify on the impact the recession is having on state budgets and their constituents.

The second panel will continue to explore how the recession is impacting individuals.  Julie Murray runs Three Square, a food bank in Las Vegas hit hard by tough economic times.  Dr. Sandy Baum is a professor of economics at Skidmore College and a senior policy analyst at the College Board.  Marsha Kreucher is the Chief Executive Officer of the Community Action Agency serving Jackson, Lenawee and Hillsdale counties in Michigan.

EVENT: Full Committee Hearing: The Need for an Economic Recovery Bill
DATE: Thursday, December 11th, 2008
TIME: 9:30 AM
LOCATION: ***ROOM CHANGE: 2167 Rayburn House Office Building ***

PANEL 1: Governor Jon Corzine, D-NJ
Governor Jim Doyle, D-WI
Governor Jim Douglas, R-VT

PANEL 2: Julie Murray, Three Square, Las Vegas Food Bank
Dr. Sandy Baum, The College Board and Skidmore College
Marsha Kreucher, Chief Executive Officer, Community Action Agency, Michigan

[Chris Santee]

And I also found this to be interesting:

Vermont delegation introduces bill to waive state transportation match requirement

WASHINGTON, DC, December 10 – The Vermont congressional delegation introduced legislation today that would waive the state and local match requirement for all federally-funded highway, transit and rail projects through September 2009.

The legislation is intended to stimulate the economy and create jobs by jump-starting projects stalled by state budget deficits. At the same time, it would immediately improve Vermont’s and the nation’s crumbling transportation infrastructure.

“In these tough economic times, we must look for creative ways to put Vermonters back to work while ensuring our state’s needs are met. This bill does just that,” Sen. Patrick Leahy, Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Peter Welch said. “We cannot afford to allow Vermont’s roads and bridges to continue to crumble – nor can we afford to allow more jobs to disappear.”

Transportation officials have reported that because of growing budget deficits at the state and local level, many ready-to-go projects simply cannot move forward without untying the strings of the required match. This bill would waive that match – usually 10 to 20 percent of the total cost – and allow those projects to move forward.

Rep. Welch introduced the bill in the House today, while Sen. Sanders and Sen. Leahy introduced companion legislation in the Senate.

[Chris Santee]

Or we could go with that cow flatulence tax.

Just kidding !!!

[Carolyn Branagan]

As alternatives to cutting the budget, Joel mentions:
Cutting Expenses
Increasing revenues
Running a deficit - which our State Constitution allows


I obviously should have explained more fully that cutting the budget means cutting expenses. The state budget pays for things including personnel, and if there is less money in the budget, fewer things can be purchased.The Joint  Fiscal Committee is already implementing Joel's first suggestion.

Increasing revenue is an interesting idea. For the last 4 years I have been assigned to the Ways and Means Committee, the legislative committee charged with examining all kinds of revenue coming into the state government. Revenue includes taxes,  fees, rental income, grants, sales receipts and federal money. Usually increasing revenue means raising taxes, which is exactly the wrong thing to do in a recession. Increasing taxes would create even harsher burdens on Vermonters, already struggling under the heaviest taxes in the country. I will continue to fight new taxes.

Deficit spending is when a government puts off into the future paying for goods and services used in the present.This is irresponsible and I do not support this kind of fiscal arrangement. Most legislators, including me, are proud of the fact that we always pass a balanced budget in Vermont, in spite of the fact we are not constitutionally required to do so.

Lastly, I cannot respond for the Governor.  However I know him to be extremely fiscally responsible, and I do not believe it is accurate to say he has 'no problem with the Federal government - using our tax dollars - to run a deficit and help Vermont's bottom line with an economic recovery plan'.  My discussions with him have shown he is very concerned about the fiscal health of our state and nation and insists on using the power he has to make sure Vermont remains strong. Fairfax voters returned Jim Douglas to the Governor's seat by nearly a 3 to 1 margin in November .

Rep. Carolyn Branagan


 

[special ED]

cut the weatherization program ,your taking more jobs away by this service and your helping the landlords make more money .Then when the employees  are not working for the state they go out at night to do side work  which they do not pay taxes on so you tell me why there is not enough tax money out there to run the state gov. I am  a good citizen ,I pay my taxes,I pay my fees,I donate money to charity,I pay my speeding tickets,and I vote .I do not need the state gov.taking work away from me then having it`s employees tax exempt.What do you think would happen if I stopped paying my lot rent tax .they would take my trailer away,so why does the state turn a blind eye to tax evation

[CJB]

Is tax evasion a significant contributing factor to our fiscal issues???

[special ED]

if enough people do it ,I would say yes