Monday, January 5th, 2009...2:59 pm
Consequences of Delay
I’m sure some of you checked out the article in yesterday’s Republic where State Treasurer Dean Martin (insert Rat Pack joke here) basically declared that the State of Arizona will be flat broke by Feburary.
Here’s a bit I found interesting towards the end of the article:
The situation might not be so dire if lawmakers had held a special session last month to start chipping away at the deficit, Martin said. Any cuts would have reduced the strain on the cash flow.
So, in other words, if legislative leaders had gone into special session like the Governor wanted back in November or December, we’d be better off. By the way, this is a Republican saying this.
But instead, these guys didn’t want to have to make a deal if it involved Janet Napolitano. Now, they will wait around until Jan Brewer comes into office, by which time, the state will be flat broke. Of course, this is exactly what some of them wanted: a dire circumstance where they can cut state programs that benefit folks they never had much use for in the first place.
So, they have delayed the cuts making the situation more difficult to deal with. But, here is the political problem for them. A deal made in November would have included Napolitano, who would have to have claimed some ownership of the mess that they come up with. Now, it will be their governor, Brewer, who will have to take responsibility for it. It will be entirely a Republican budget. When the thing sours with the public, they will have no one to blame except themselves.
NB – With Martin positioning himself as a Cassandra and against the legislature (and maybe even Brewer), you think he’s thinking about another office in 2010?
9 Comments
January 5th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Sometime after Presidents’ day, AZ will have a fire sale to raise $$ to keep the state open until FY 2010.
Items to be sold: Tom Mix statue (nobody stops there anymore anyway -hell who remembers who he was.. besides us natives)
Copper from capitol building dome (too bad copper prices have tanked).
Beachfront property in Yuma. (just waiting for California to finnaly fall into the ocean)
various rest areas along the hiway (hell the have closed enough of them already!)
vast stretches of open land (bought by certain developers who just so happened to have given $$ to certain politicians)
London Bridge (Queen wants it back)
January 5th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
Here’s the problem – the state is running a deficit of about $100 million per month ($1.2 billion annually). Every month they delay in making cuts, the amount is being compounded.
Think of it this way — If I have a $100,000 annual deficit, I can eliminate two $50,000/year jobs at the beginning of the year and I will be in the clear. If I wait till the year is half over, I have to eliminate FOUR $50,000 jobs, because I’m only going to save $25,000 per position. So the months and months of delay by the legislature (does anyone really think they will fix this in January?) means that the personnel cuts will have to get bigger and bigger. And like Ted says, Jan Brewer gets to own the whole thing.
January 5th, 2009 at 10:45 pm
Big, big stretch there.
This governor wiped out the state and now you’re trying to point your collective finger at who?
Nice try but that is the weakest argument, among many, you’ve cobbled together on this site. This is Napolitano’s mess and you are in the Mariana Trench of deep denial by trying to delude yourself otherwise. It was her budget ratified by every Dem and a few lily-livered Republicans. Every Democrat voted for it…every one.
Gov. Napolitano’s “solutions” included paying bills late and deferring necessary expenditures to the next FY and I can’t even remember the other “non solutions” reported in the paper. Most of these “solutions” involved making the problem worse for the next year.
Nope, need to throw the BS flag on you on this one.
January 5th, 2009 at 11:19 pm
True, the FY09 budget was essentially a Napolitano budget, and the govenor should have taken serious steps to reduce spending in September when the revenue red-ink writing was on the wall for. However, WHY did the Republican legislature refuse to meet with her in special session in early December to try to deal with at least part of the deficit? Where is the leadership on either side???
January 6th, 2009 at 6:26 am
Gimmickry and deferring tough decisions have been the hallmarks of Arizona tax and budget decisions during the Napolitano, Hull and Symington administrations. Janet cut deals with the GOP that her caucus occasionally deplored, but at least she had the right priorities when it came to education, infrastructure and other issues that a high-growth state must confront.
The voters in this state, cheered on by the Republicans, put state government in a box with the ballot measure that mandates a supermajority to pass any tax hike, or even to close loopholes. Until that atrocity is out of the way, everything done in Phoenix is merely tinkering.
January 6th, 2009 at 8:58 am
The Governor called for a special session in the fall. Flipper, I am really uncertain as yo your motives here. It sounds like you care more about democrats looking bad the the fate of the State Government. Please offer some constructive solutions….What should be cut? Courts? AHCCCS? Universities? Roads? Schools? All Day Kindergarten? How much will that save? Why are tax revenues so low anyway? What are your “Solutions” how many people should lose their jobs?
January 6th, 2009 at 9:54 pm
Great switcheroo Paul. Tedski’s post was about making the GOP “look bad”, not about soliciting solutions. Sorry I felt the need to call him on it.
Now to your point: I’m sure many solutions were offered over the past few years that the Governor and the Dems ignored. As I pointed out, the Governor offered several “solutions” that were akin to sweeping problems under the rug.
Blame the economy or whatever you want but Gov. Napolitano was the CEO who drove us into this fiscal wreck and she’s bailing out just as the airbags are deploying. Except we don’t have any airbags and heads are cracking on the inside of the windshield.
Unfortunately, a lot of people are losing their jobs because the JLBC, and other, economic reports and forecasts were ignored.
Gee, why are tax revenues so low? We’ve had record growth–we’re about to pick up two congressional seats. I doubt tax rate cuts have offset more taxpayers. None of these new residents spending any money or paying income tax? I doubt it. What was the loss of the property tax suspension? $250M? Good start but we’re in the hole a billion and a half…and more for next year.
We’ve been spending too much. Spending has outpaced growth. Forecasts highlighted the revenue vs. expenditures trend, maybe not to the nth degree but the trend was right and this state spent money the governor knew it didn’t have. Now, instead of holding the line for the last few years we’re going to have to make deep cuts.
So, since you felt the need to shift the focus from Mr. Tedski’s proposition, there you are.
January 7th, 2009 at 12:28 am
Flipper–
The assumption of spending outpacing growth as being a problem is problemmatic. That assumption mistakenly assumes that the that the level/quality of government services [K-12 and higher education, healthcare, consumer/environmental protection] transportation] that the majority of the voters want remain static–which obviously isn’t the case, given the voter initiatives that have passed. That assumption assumes that there are no recessions. That assumption assumes that all other conditions remain static [a crazy assumption]. Certainly to some extent, the level/quality of government services can increase with innovation and more efficiency in delivering these services, and the government should do all it can to improve services in ways that are cost neutral or save money. But decreasing student/teacher ratios costs money; attracting and retaining good professors at the state universities cost money; expanding healthcare cost money; etc.
January 7th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
Flipper–tax revenues are down because the economy is in the tank, and keeping folks at work is necessary. Deficit spending may become necessary. But complaining about Napolitano, when some of her plans to save cash were blocked by Speaker Weiers, Presidents Burns and Bee and Russell Pearce. All parties are culpable and I will not allow you dishonor our Governor by unfairly blaming Arizona’s financial woes on her.
*By comparison, Arizona while not being fiscally sound, is not in as compromisable a position as other States are in. Dean Martin knows the state can be solvent until July or August, before deficit spending, bonds or securing loans may become necessary. There are also funding streams that can be diverted if the legislature allows them to be to last us into June of 2011. Please do not make generalizations about one party or another, I was only asking about practical solutions and places to cut. For which you gave none. Any chance you could post under your full name like I do? I would greatly appreciate it.