A Last-Minute Plea to Minimize Harm

Given our state’s financial situation, all agree on one conclusion: The state budget being written today must spend less. However, when making painful budget cuts, we must set clear priorities and seek to minimize harm.

We should prioritize (1) protecting quality education, (2) keeping nursing homes open and (3) requiring all big corporations to pay their fair share.

The proposed Republican budget balances the 2012-13 budget by cuts alone. They do not spend a single dime from the Rainy Day Fund in 2012 and 2013. And their budget assumes no new revenue — not even from the reduction of tax loopholes enjoyed by out of state big corporations.

Their approach is a double hit to our economy. The first hit lands now during our fragile recovery. The Legislative Budget Board — an independent agency of the Legislature — estimates the proposed budget will have the effect of raising unemployment and causing 335,000 fewer private and public sector jobs by 2013. The second and more devastating hit to jobs comes when our children are older. Because this budget cuts education by approximately 20 percent, fewer students will graduate from high school and fewer will afford college. At the highest levels of education, doors will be closing. Our medical schools have reported they will admit fewer students in their graduate and residency programs. How will we grow the quality jobs of the future if we fail to educate those who aspire to be doctors, educators, entrepreneurs and other creative professionals?

The Legislature should take these three critical steps to balance the budget:

First, cut ineffective programs that are distant to serving young children and vulnerable Texans like our seniors in nursing homes.

Second, recognize expenditures are expenditures whether they are found in our budget or in our tax code. Should a tax break given to a special interest be as important as fully funding our public schools? Specifically, we should use the comptroller’s Tax Exemptions and Incidence Study to identify tax breaks we can no longer afford. We should first eliminate those for out of state companies.

Finally, we should use the Rainy Day Fund — not all of it, but enough to prevent the greatest harm to our schools and nursing homes. We should keep in mind that the Rainy Day Fund self-replenishes when oil and gas prices are high, as they have been for most of this year. Experts estimate we could use $6 billion more in Rainy Day funds and be confident that today’s higher gas prices will add another $2 billion more. Rainy Day funds represent taxes already paid. Using them to prevent unnecessary cuts to education will not only protect education but also prevent job losses caused by the current budget proposal.

We cannot solve this budget crisis with blind, across-the-board cuts. There are better choices. If we return to the pragmatic political approach that once defined our politics, we will keep alive the tradition of each generation sacrificing for a better Texas.

This article was contributed by State Rep. Mike Villarreal, D-San Antonio, who serves on the House Appropriations Committee. It originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://trib.it/idyt3F.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Texas Budget Cycle (Non-Schoolhouse Rock Version)

Confused about the state’s budget? Trust us — you’re not alone. The Texas Legislature creates a spending plan every two years, but it takes almost as much time to prepare that plan. This session, lawmakers will set a budget that will be implemented in fiscal years 2012 and 2013 (Sept. 1, 2011, to Aug. 31, 2012). This week, House members will be tested when they vote on their version of a general appropriations bill. Lawmakers are considering unprecedented cuts in every area of state spending, from public education and health services to public safety. Below is a flow chart to help you understand where we are in the process (highlighted in yellow) and what steps are next (highlighted in gray). If you click on the boxes, you’ll see we’ve linked to the applicable web sites and documents so that you can take a look for yourself at the bills being considered.

If you’ve never paid much attention to the budgeting process, this is a good time to start. Here’s a few points to help you understand the big picture:

1. Texas is constitutionally mandated to balance its budget, which means lawmakers are not allowed to spend more than what the state generates in revenue. This means they’re left with three options: cut the budget, raise taxes or go for a combination of both. So far, the GOP majority has expressed serious doubts and has in some cases outright pledged to not consider any kind of revenue enhancement measures.

2. The Legislature is charged with balancing the budget for the current biennium (Sept. 1, 2010, to Aug. 31, 2011) before it can work on the next biennium’s budget. On Thursday, the House will vote on HB 4 and HB 275, which deal directly with closing the 2011 deficit and authorizing a withdrawal from the Rainy Day Fund. On Friday, members are scheduled to vote on HB 1, the general appropriations budget for 2012 and 2013. Meanwhile, the Senate is working on its own version of the bill. See the chart to understand how it works.

3. Watch Comptroller Susan Combs. In January, Combs released the Biennial Revenue Estimate, which forecasts the state’s revenue collections. She updates lawmakers on those numbers as they change. Right now, they’re hanging on her every word because every dollar she can find in revenue means fewer cuts going ahead. Her words have power. In early March, Combs told lawmakers the state will not be able to pay its bills through August without dipping into the Rainy Day Fund.

4. That Rainy Day Fund is estimated to amount to about $9.4 billion by the end of 2013. This week, the House will vote on whether to spend up to $3.2 billion of that savings account to close the fiscal year 2011 deficit. That leaves about $6 billion in the fund, and you can count on a big fight over whether to let that money sit as the state stares down a shortfall that could be as much as $27 billion in 2012 and 2013. (See our infographic on Rainy Day Fund politics here.)

5. To wrap it up, the House is voting on three major bills this week. HB 4 is a supplemental bill that will make permanent the cuts implemented during the last biennium in addition to other decreases. HB 275 will authorize the House to withdraw from the Rainy Day Fund. HB 1 is the general appropriations bill for the next two years. You will likely see support (along party lines) for HB 4, widespread support for HB 275 and a long debate over HB 1 and whether it is an adequate budget that meets the needs of the state.

It’s not too late to have your voice heard. Engage in the process by contacting your lawmakers (we’ve made it easier for you with our directory). Share your thoughts below. The Tribune will be following the House votes on HB 4, HB 275 and HB 1 on Thursday and Friday.

Texas Biennial Budget Cycle
KEY
Budget Instructions to All Agencies
Agency Budget Requests Submitted to LBB & GOPP
LBB Analysis of Requests GOBPP Analysis of
Public Hearings for Agencies Conducted by LBB & GOBPP
LBB May Meet to Act on Staff Recommendations
LBB Recommended Budget & Appropriations Bill to Legislature Governor Submits Executive Budget to Legislature
House Senate
Legislature
Senate Finance Committee House Appropriations Committee
SFC Subcommittees HAC Subcommittees
Public Hearings Public Hearings
SFC Mark-up HAC Mark-up
SFC Recommendations to Full Senate HAC Recommendations to Full House
Senate Version House Version
Conference Committee
Committee Version
Senate House
Comptroller
Governor
State Agencies
Source: Senate Resource Center

For more information about the budget cycle, read the Senate Research Center’s Budget 101: A Guide to the Budget Process in Texas.

Ben Hasson also contributed to this article, which originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://trib.it/i3Umve.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Looking for Funds, Texas Eyes School Reserves

Photo illustration by Todd Wiseman

Pressed on using the Rainy Day Fund to help close of the state’s massive budget shortfall and avoid dramatic cuts, particularly to school funding, Gov. Rick Perry earlier this month pointed to another source of money he believes should be tapped first: the reserves held by many Texas school districts.

“It’s about $12 billion in reserve accounts in our independent school districts, so should the state spend their Rainy Day Fund before those are accessed?” Perry said. “It’s a good debate to have. My answer is no, I don’t think so.”

According to spreadsheets prepared for the governor and provided to the Tribune, the state’s 1,030 school districts have — in total — $10.2 billion in reserves and another $2.1 billion in unspent federal stimulus money. Facing a reduction in state education spending of between $4 billion and $10 billion, many school districts have said they will be forced to lay off teachers and other staff and even close schools. Can they use their reserve funds to avoid such draconian cutbacks? The answer is not as simple as the governor’s statement would imply.

First, they’re required by the state to keep reserves to cover cash flow deficits and to be able to run for 60 days. Only $439.4 million of that total balance — less than 5 percent — exceeds the state standard. Second, the fact that one school district has a large reserve fund does nothing to help another district that has little or nothing in the bank. While 591 school districts have more money in reserve accounts than the state requires them to hold, 419 districts have less than they’re supposed to have (20 were right on the mark as of the end of January). But that money can’t be shifted between districts.

“I don’t think we will be using those funds in any way, shape or form,” says Florence Shapiro, a Plano Republican who chairs the Senate Education Committee and also sits on the Finance Committee. But she makes it clear that the districts can use the funds to ease the burden — even if the state doesn’t order them to do so. “There was a rumor we were going to raid them. … I think what we will ask is for them to be a partner with us. We dipped into our Rainy Day Fund, and you should dip into yours.”

Shapiro says it makes sense for TEA to give the districts some flexibility on how much money they should hold in reserve. But she also acknowledges their need to keep some money on hand to handle cash flow issues, like the one that crops up when the state — as it’s planning to do — balances its own budget by delaying payments to school districts. That’s a small one — just a day’s delay, from one budget to another one — but it’s an example.

“We’re operating a business. We educate kids, but we also have budgets,” says Amy Beneski, director of government relations at the Texas Association of School Administrators. “We have to keep the lights on, and it’s just sound business practice to have reserves on hand.”

Beneski says the cash reserves allow districts to cover cash flow changes without borrowing from banks, and they play into bond ratings, too. And while some districts might find the reserves useful if the state cuts funding, she notes that many districts don’t have even 60 days of reserves on hand. They have less flexibility if the state pulls back.

“The only way I would consider fund balances would be to see what kind of position the school district was in, what position we put them in,” says Rep. Rob Eissler, R-The Woodlands. “We don’t want to kill anybody.”

The big numbers don’t necessarily come from the big districts. Dallas ISD had $37.7 million on hand at the end of January — $96.6 million less than the optimum amount set by TEA. Other big districts had less in reserve than TEA would consider “optimum”: Austin, Fort Worth, El Paso, Round Rock, Aldine, North East, Cypress-Fairbanks, Spring Branch, Carrollton-Farmers Branch, Plano, Garland, Richardson, Northside, Humble, Fort Bend and Pharr-San Juan-Alamo.

Other districts overshot the runway and have far more in their reserves than TEA’s recommendation of enough money to run the districts for 60 days: Lewisville, Irving, Houston and Eanes are among those. The variances vary: Houston had 5 percent more than recommended, while Lewisville had 231 percent of what TEA considers a minimum.

That same thing is true for the districts with too little money on hand: Dallas was 72 percent below optimum, while Austin was 11 percent under.

Aides to the governor say they’re not suggesting the districts should spend the money, but think the balances indicate that — in more than half the districts — the budget situation isn’t as dire as some have said. Several Texas districts have declared “exigencies” based on their reading of the state’s budget deliberations; those declarations allow them to lay off employees and take other measures to get ready for lean times.

In a spreadsheet listing the reserve balances for each district, they have also sorted the districts so that each lawmaker can look at the local ISDs and find out which ones are over and which are under. The sheet also includes, by district, the status of federal stimulus funds. Of the $5.5 billion available, districts had yet to draw $2.1 billion by the end of January. That money has to be used by the end of the fiscal year. According to TEA, must of it was already obligated but hadn’t yet been sent to the districts. Some of it can be used for a wide variety of things within a district, but some of the federal money is targeted to particular programs and can’t be used for anything else.

Eissler, a former school board member who now heads the House’s Public Education Committee, says it “would be a strong reach” to try to get the school districts to throw their money into the pot to make the state budget work. He doesn’t think it would be a smart thing to do. It’s not the state’s money, for one thing, and the districts aren’t all in the same financial shape.

“Let’s say School District A really watched their money and really got good results and has a healthy fund balance, and we’re going to penalize them because School District B just spent everything they had and didn’t pay attention to their finances and they’re in the hole?” he says. “We’re trying to reward productivity. That would not.”

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://trib.it/gjhxCy.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Lawmakers Weigh Public Schools Against Budget Cuts

 

Photo by Bob Daemmrich

Texas legislators have to choose between mobs.

 

One group has gathered several times over the last two years under the Gadsden Flag — the yellow one with the snake and the motto “Don’t Tread on Me.” The other is a more recent phenomenon and its members gather under signs that say things like, “If you can read this, thank a teacher.”

Legislators attempting to balance the budget are also doing some political balancing, trying to find a way to calm the voters so they can get re-elected and keep their jobs.

That was evident this week. Faced with a $4.3 billion budget deficit for the current biennium and with no other way to keep things going, Gov. Rick Perry and Texas House leaders agreed to tap the state’s Rainy Day Fund.

And then the governor slammed the door, saying he wouldn’t sign the next budget — with an even bigger projected shortfall — if it relies on any of the more than $6 billion left in the state’s savings account.

Senate sentiment is different. Senators from both parties have been lamenting cuts for days, especially if the state has the money on hand and just won’t spend it.

In the House, the stronger urge is to cut spending and to leave money in the bank account against future budget problems. It takes a supermajority to get into those savings. The deal cut this week will probably get the 90 votes it needs in the 150-member House — but getting the 100 required for the next budget would qualify as a magic trick.

House Democrats owe little to the Republicans in charge. That’s one of the effects of the Republicans’ 101-49 supermajority; the leaders didn’t really need the Democrats to organize the House, so they didn’t do the sorts of favors they can call in now to get the votes they need on the budget.

That’s compounded, to some extent, by the leaders’ priorities. Lawmakers have been busy with a plate full of red-meat conservative issues like pre-abortion sonograms, photo voter ID, sanctuary cities, eminent domain and a balanced federal budget.

Leaving the Rainy Day Fund untouched would remove Democrats from the budget equation on the House side. The Democrats’ leverage comes from the split in the GOP: Not all Republicans want to get into the state’s bank account, and those who do will need help from the Democrats to get the required 100 votes. The Democrats are willing to do that, but only if budgeteers are willing to pay for education and social service programs that are dear to their constituents.

If the Republicans don’t tap the fund, they won’t need 100 votes in the House, which probably means they can pass a budget without a Democratic vote. But it takes two-thirds of the Senate just to bring up the budget for consideration, and Steve Ogden, the Republican of Bryan who chairs the Finance Committee, has said he doesn’t have the votes for a bare-bones plan. Ogden adds votes in favor of the budget as he adds meat to its bones, but getting to the needed 21 votes without tapping the $6 billion still in the state’s savings account seems unlikely, if not impossible.

There are other distractions. Lawmakers are drawing new political districts this year. Redistricting hasn’t been getting a lot of attention from outside the building — the budget has been gulping up that oxygen — but members will be increasingly preoccupied by politics as the session continues.

The House is pinching pennies and is on track to give its initial approval to a budget that cuts deeply into public and higher education and social services. The Senate plan will be more expensive, relying on the Rainy Day Fund, new revenue sources or both. The negotiations over the differences will last most of the next two months.

And then it’s down to the governor and whether he’ll sign what they come up with. Without new money, he’s got problems in the Senate. But now he’s got promises to keep.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://trib.it/e1Mnuh.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Mental Health Cuts Would Strain Local Texas Jails

Phoio by Todd Wiseman

Sterling Shepherd sat at a metal picnic table dressed in an orange Harris County Jail-issued jumpsuit and described what got him into this situation — again.

“I’m extremely mentally ill and extremely intelligent,” said Shepherd, a 43-year-old with intense brown eyes and a big grin. During a recent 12-minute interview, Shepherd veered in and out of reality, talking at times lucidly about taking medication for his severe bipolar disorder and at other times describing how Vice President Joe Biden spoke to him through the television and explaining that Pope Benedict the XVI is his grandfather.

It was Shepherd’s eighth stay at Houston’s Harris County Jail, a facility the size of two football fields that houses more than 10,000 inmates. He is one of about 2,400 inmates in the facility taking psychotropic medications. The jail is the largest mental institution in the state. It has a special unit with 108 beds for the severely mentally ill, where guards wear less intimidating uniforms, nurses are on duty 24 hours a day and inmates undergo intensive psychiatric treatment.

“We’ve done everything we can do to make it therapeutic,” said Sgt. Bernard Kelly, a supervisor in the jail’s mental health unit. Some inmates say it’s the best mental health care available to them in Houston. It all costs the county about $27 million a year.

Harris County officials have seen the number of mentally ill inmates explode since 2003, the last time Texas had a budget crisis and made major cuts. Then, there were fewer than three full-time psychiatrists on duty at the jail. Now, there are more than 15. Often they see the same mentally ill inmates repeatedly.

“It just becomes a chronic cycle,” said Sylvia Muzquiz-Drummond, medical director of the mental health division of the Mental Health and Mental Retardation Authority of Harris County.

As lawmakers consider even deeper cuts this year to deal with a budget shortfall estimated between $15 billion and $27 billion, jail officials across Texas are deeply concerned that proposed reductions in community-based mental health treatment will exacerbate the problem. Without resources in the community, more mentally ill Texans are likely to end up on the streets, in emergency rooms and behind bars, and it will cost local taxpayers even more to care for them.

“We can’t not respond,” said Dr. Michael Seale, executive director of health services at the Harris County Sheriff’s Office. “We can’t not put people in jail.”

State lawmakers are considering budget proposals that would reduce community-based health care services for adults and children and for community mental hospitals by about $152 million in 2012 and 2013. It is about a 20 percent reduction in financing from the previous two-year budget. For community mental hospitals, financing would fall about 3 percent, but the money would be split among five facilities instead of three.

By 2006, Texas already ranked 50th among the states in per capita spending on mental health care, according to the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. The strained budget allows the Harris County mental health agency to serve only about 25 percent of the adults in need and about 18 percent of the children, said Betsy Schwartz, president and chief executive of Mental Health America of Greater Houston.

Currently, there are about 2,000 people with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and serious clinical depression on the agency’s waiting list. “We’re already talking about a system that was hemorrhaging,” she said. In Houston alone, the proposed cuts would mean up to 2,000 of the 8,500 adults who now receive community-based services would be turned away.

Cutting those services would take a devastating human toll, Schwartz said, but it would also come at an enormous financial cost. When people with untreated mental health problems fall into crisis, it is much more expensive to provide care in an emergency room, jail or crisis center.

The Harris County Neuropsychiatric Center saw a 45 percent increase in the number of crisis patients entering the center from 2008 to 2010, she said. Every time a patient walks into the center in crisis, it costs $800 to perform an initial exam, she said. By comparison, it costs about $12 a day for community-based mental health care services.

“It’s not like people are going to disappear and the needs are going to go away,” she said. “It may shift the burden from state dollars to county dollars.”

Although he disdains the idea of further cutting mental health funding, state Rep. Garnet Coleman, D-Houston, said lawmakers who are determined to close the budget gap without raising taxes have few other options when it comes to reducing health care expenditures. “Unfortunately for mental health, at this moment, there isn’t an alternative,” Coleman said.

Patty Wood knows that she would probably be back in jail without the community-based services that help her stay on medication, see her doctors and learn new life skills like typing — she’s up to 15 words per minute. “I’ve been incarcerated a lot, because it’s illegal to self-medicate,” said Wood, 48, who has bipolar and schizoaffective disorders.

She has been jailed for prostitution and drug and alcohol addiction. As of last week, though, Wood had been clean for about seven months with the help of mental health agency. “It helps me to function on everyday stuff,” she said. “Being part of society is not very comfortable and not something I’m used to.”

Wood said she is hopeful she can get a job and end the incarceration cycle. “I’m just a person trying to make it,” she said.

Shepherd, who landed back in jail on Super Bowl Sunday after he attacked a staff member at the Harris County Psychiatric Center, said he hoped that this stint behind bars would be his last. The jail psychiatrist, he said, is adamant that he takes his medication. And the jail staff said last week that Shepherd was more stable than before when they had seen him. If he can get help and keep taking his medications on the outside, Shepherd said he thinks he can stay stable. “I’m praying to the Lord Jesus Christ not to come back,” he said.

Jail officials and mental health providers are praying, too, that all the work they have done to help people like Shepherd and Wood is not undone by state lawmakers’ budget decisions. If community-based services aren’t around to help, said Kelly, who has worked in the Harris County Jail for more than a decade, he knows he will see them again.

“We let them out the door only to crash and burn,” he said. “We’re setting them up for disaster.”

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://trib.it/ecpYew.

Enhanced by Zemanta

In Texas, Gambling’s Odds Have Improved

Gov. Rick Perry was for legalized gambling before he was against it.

In 2004, the governor added video lottery terminals at racetracks to the list of issues he would allow lawmakers to consider during a special session — when the governor controls what’s on the agenda. They ultimately didn’t produce any legislation, but it was an indication that Perry wasn’t hostile to expanding the state’s legal gambling — at least if the money was for school finance.

His position has changed, and like the Republican Party of Texas and many of his core voters, he no longer supports expanded gambling in Texas — although that might not make any difference this year. Texas allows bingo and parimutuel wagering on dogs and horses, and runs a lottery, but for casino games and slots, Texans go elsewhere.

In its annual reports to its governor and state Legislature, the Louisiana Gaming Control Board frequently writes about Texas. We’re apparently the mother lode for the Sportsman’s Paradise. In the most recent report, for 2009-10, the state recorded $723.5 million in gaming revenue. The board members are worried that competition from other states could take away money and cut into SELF, the Support Education in Louisiana Fund, where the gaming money goes.

For instance, the state’s Lake Charles market accounted for $482.4 million in revenue in that latest report, and has this asterisk attached to it: “Most of this area’s customers originate from the Houston area, and, like Shreveport-Bossier, would be hurt by legalized gambling in Texas. Pro-gambling lobbyists have so far been unsuccessful at bringing gambling to Texas, but persist in their efforts to do so.”

That they do.

The promoters here are lobbied up, with groups advancing sometimes competing arguments for more liberal bingo rules, for allowing slot machines to operate at existing racetracks and on Indian reservations, and for full-blown destination resort casinos in the state’s major cities and coastal tourist spots. The casino bill will be carried, once again, by state Rep. Jim Pitts, R-Waxahachie, which is significant in part because he’s the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, which is writing the state budget.

The existing forms of gambling in Texas all got through the Legislature in previous tough financial times. It’s a simple formula: the state needs money to keep programs going, it’s not a tax, it doesn’t require the governor’s signature and it does require voter approval. That’s four kinds of political insulation, and they’re all in play now.

Texas has a budget shortfall of $15 billion to $27 billion, depending on whether you’re measuring how much it would take to match current spending — the low number — or current services.

Perry reverted to his anti-gambling position after the 2004 effort, but unless he launches a vociferous campaign against it, that probably won’t matter. Slots or casinos go straight from the Legislature to the voters without stopping at the governor’s desk. Public opinion, measured both in industry polls and in third-party polls, shows support for expanded gambling, especially for proposals that have local options and when the money is directed at something voters support, like public education.

The promoters say slot machines could be shipped into the state and be operating in no time at all. That’s important to lawmakers looking to balance the budget: If the machines are up and running quickly, they’re producing state revenue quickly. That makes the budget part work.

Casinos take longer to set up, but one proposal would charge the licensees a huge fee up front — $50 million, say, or $100 million — and that income could help budgeteers while the casinos are being built. Neither is technically a tax — at least not the kind of tax that attracts voters to anti-government rallies at the state Capitol.

It’s not an easy issue. The opposition, which includes a diverse mixture from moralists to budget experts to policy wonks, is strong and persuasive. Lawmakers tried in 2003 and in 2005 but couldn’t get the votes even though the state faced a budget shortfall and needed a financing source for a major rewrite of the state’s school finance formulas.

This is the biggest shortfall in the state’s modern history, and it’s a remarkably anti-tax Legislature, even for Texas. In spite of the odds, for gamblers, hope springs eternal.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://trib.it/hbIBEl.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Sleeves of a Vest

This is but a snapshot. A frozen moment in time, guaranteed to transmogrify on an hourly basis. So, knowing the situation is fluid, here’s your daily budget update and if I were you, I’d find a nice comfy chair to plop down into, because this promises to be more frustrating than translating Sanskrit into Japanese using Morse code smoke signals in the rain.

President Obama released HIS budget plan, which calls for tens of billions of dollars of program cuts mixed with tax increases. The Republicans countered with THEIR plan specifying nine figures of cuts only, and Ron Paul, well, he just wants to invade China, give them a proper thrashing and take all our money back. Meaning that although we’re less than two months deep into the 112th Congress, looks like business as usual.

Abstract-theory time is over now and actual programs are being singled out for devastation, decimation and elimination, and as we all know: One man’s pork is another man’s paycheck. But this is about symbolism, not jobs. Tea Partiers were promised $100 billion in cuts and they’re going to get $100 billion in cuts, even though Charlie Sheen has a better chance of being appointed St. Sebastian’s Girls School choir chaperone on a field trip to Vegas than the GOP proposal has of surviving a presidential veto.

Nevertheless, conservatives are cementing their ideological bona fides by rounding up the usual suspects and painting budgetary crosshairs on the faces of their mortal enemies: the EPA, AmeriCorps, Public Broadcasting, and Amtrak. The ugly little secret being — spending at the Pentagon will rise and no one need talk about Social Security or Medicare until experts have analyzed the polls on this present skirmish at least a gazilliondy times.

As expected, folks have taken to each other’s plan like a pod of giant squid to hot-air ballooning. Obama continues his tap dance down the middle. The Right whines he hasn’t cut deep enough and The Left pouts he’s gone too far. He compares the GOP strategy to a dieter who vows to lose 30 pounds, and does so by cutting off a leg. And the Repubs fire back he’s a girly man scared to make the tough decisions, who could provide better leadership by curling into a fetal position behind the couch licking the cat’s butt.

Congress has to pass a spending bill before March 4, or the entire government shuts down, which wouldn’t be so bad if it weren’t for that whole roads and hospitals and customs and air-traffic controllers thing. Everyone agrees the gulf between the two combatants is wide but a new fiscal reality is here to stay and will affect education, security and agriculture, meaning more students per class, fewer cops on the streets and larger pieces of pig hoof in your wiener.

While the adversaries bristle and posture in public like male porcupines in pre-mating heat, Barack remains confident he can find common ground with the GOP leadership in private. Good Luck. Considering the smug intransigence of the Boehner Clan, that sounds like the political equivalent of pinning your hopes to escape a burning building on tying together the sleeves of a vest.

Will Durst is a very funny writer who often tells jokes to drunks in bars. Check him out at Zanies, Downtown Chicago, Feb. 22-27.

Enhanced by Zemanta

UT/Texas Tribune Poll: Mixed Signals on Budget Cuts

By a margin of more than 2 to 1, Texas voters believe that lawmakers should solve the state’s massive shortfall by cutting the budget, according to the latest University of Texas/Texas Tribune Poll, but their enthusiasm dissipates when asked if they support specific cuts.

“We really want to slash the budget, but not anything in it,” says pollster Daron Shaw, a professor of government at UT.

On a sliding scale of 0-10, poll respondents were asked whether they would prefer to balance the state’s next budget through budget cuts, by raising revenues, or something in between. Only 4 percent proposed doing it all with new revenue, while 17 percent would do it all with budget cuts. Another 22 percent landed right in the middle. But the rest leaned more toward cuts than toward raising new money for the state government.

Still, when asked specifically what should be cut, voters were more divided. Given a list of things that could be cut to balance the budget and asked to check each that they’d consider, the voters were protective of state programs, and overwhelmingly so. They oppose cuts to public education, 82 percent; pre-kindergarten, 62 percent; state grants to college students, 73 percent; state contributions to teacher and state employee retirement programs, 69 percent; the Children’s Health Insurance Program, 87 percent; to state environmental regulation that could be picked up by the federal government, 65 percent; cuts to Medicaid providers like doctors and hospitals, 86 percent; state funding for nursing home care, 90 percent; prisons for adults or for juveniles, both 67 percent; new highway construction, 63 percent; border security, 85 percent; or for closing four community colleges, 77 percent.

Many of the items on that list are among the prime cuts made in proposed budgets from the House, the Senate and the governor.

“Frankly, if you’re assuming the results of the last election mean you should cut and that people meant government should completely go away, you’re overreaching,” says pollster Jim Henson, who teaches government and runs the Texas Politics Project at UT.

Republicans and independents were more likely than Democrats to prefer spending cuts over revenue increases. Men were more likely than women, and whites more likely than blacks and Hispanics, to lean toward cuts. Those trends were evident in the questions about specfic cuts, too, but with only a few exceptions, each of those subgroups was against the specific cuts in the poll. Those who identified themselves as “strong Republicans” and “lean Republican” support cuts to pre-K classes, as do voters over 65. Republican-leaning independents would narrowly support cuts in public employee retirement plans. But the overwhelming result is the same in all groups: Support for specific cuts is dramatically lower than the general support for a smaller state government.

The poll explored some ways to raise money for state government and with a couple of exceptions, they’re not popular, either. A majority — 61 percent — would support legalizing and taxing casinos. A smaller majority — 52 percent — would support higher taxes on alcoholic beverages.

Then there’s the list of things they don’t like, along with the percentages of the opposition: surcharges on gas-guzzlers, 80 percent; banning cell phone use by drivers and fining the violators, 54 percent; legalizing and taxing marijuana, 61 percent; eliminating August sales tax holidays if the outlook doesn’t improve, 61 percent; increasing state sales tax rates, 86 percent; or imposing a state income tax, 94 percent.

The state will have $9.4 billion available in its Rainy Day Fund, according to Comptroller Susan Combs. Only 9 percent would use all of that money, and 24 percent would use none of it. Most — 55 percent — would spend some, but not all of it to avoid budget cuts.

“If you’re a purely a craven and political weasel, you have to pay some lip service to cutting and then take a strong look at gambling and other options,” Shaw says. “What it says, basically, is that if you are interested in cutting, you have to either ignore or lead on public opinion.

“If you want [to shrink government], you have to make it about cutting the deficit. If you don’t want it, you talk about specific programs,” he says.

Both pollsters say state leaders will have to pick a way through the public’s split opinion — cut government but don’t cut anything dear — to stay out of trouble in the next political season. Henson says the numbers don’t offer a roadmap to anyone looking for a way out of the state’s budget swamp.

“It’s no surprise that people talk about wanting a better outcome without having a well-developed idea about how to get there,” he says. “It’s interesting to see the legislators and the voters both in a state of muddling.”

This latest University of Texas/Texas Tribune poll is an internet survey of 800 registered voters conducted Feb. 11-17 and has a margin of error of +/- 3.46 percent.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://trib.it/gVAZf7.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Faith-Based Groups Brace for Brutal Budget Cuts

Imam Islam Mossad of the North Austin Muslim Community Center recites the Islamic call to prayer to start Texas Impact's interfaith prayer service on the capitol steps on the first day of session. Members of Christian, Muslim and Jewish faith traditions gathered to pray for legislators and to ask that they act as responsible shepherds for the people of Texas.

On one of the coldest days of the new year, a group of people of Christian, Muslim and Jewish faiths stood shivering outside the Capitol, praying for lawmakers to have empathy for the neediest of Texans as they decide how to fill a shortfall in the state budget estimated at between $15 billion and $27 billion.

It was inaugural day of the 82nd legislative session, and new and returning lawmakers were streaming into the pink granite building to begin their work.

“Vote as if you had nowhere to escape from this cold,” Steven Folberg, rabbi at Congregation Beth Israel in Austin, implored legislators in his prayer. “Vote as if you are hungry and you don’t know where your next meal is coming from. Vote as if you felt vulnerable and unprotected.”

Like many other Texas groups, faith organizations that lobby lawmakers are facing a brutal budgetary session. Texas Impact, a statewide interfaith organization that includes Congregation Beth Israel, is one of several faith-based groups working to help spare some of the state’s most vulnerable — the poor, the disabled, the elderly and children — from the brunt of the deep cuts lawmakers are contemplating. While the list of social issues each of the groups will take on this year may differ, they agree that the consequences of the budget crisis will affect them all. And it’s not only a moral issue for the religious groups; it concerns their own bottom lines, too. Because when the government doesn’t provide for the needy, the needy look to the church and other faith-based organizations.

“The budget shortfall is not made up,” Bee Moorhead, director of Texas Impact, told her members who gathered at Central Presbyterian’s Fellowship Hall later in the afternoon after appearing at the Capitol for the Legislature’s opening day. “That is not political rhetoric. If we turn our pockets inside out, we really don’t have it.”

Both the House and Senate have released their first versions of the budget, and while the cuts to education, environmental agencies, and health and human services are severe, Moorhead said she believes it is at least an honest attempt to grapple with an extremely difficult reality. What the budget proposals show, she said, is that “with less money many [state] programs will do less of the things they are set up to do.” Still, she recognizes that these budget proposals are only a starting point. There are still many months to go before the end of the session.

Faith groups are among a variety of advocates who have joined together to ask lawmakers to look not just to drastic cuts to balance the budget. They want legislators to consider using the Rainy Day Fund, to eliminate tax loopholes and perhaps even raise some new fees and taxes.

“We want to balance the budget, but at the same time, we don’t want to throw people out of the nursing home,” said Suzii Paynter, director of the Texas Baptist Christian Life Commission.

Paynter said she hopes legislators would look to sources of revenue like the Rainy Day Fund and increasing the alcohol excise tax to balance the budget.

But there is one revenue-generating option nearly all the faith groups eschew: gambling. “We are very clear in saying we oppose the expansion of gambling in order to solve the budget deficit,” said Jennifer Allmon, associate director of the Texas Catholic Conference.

Clay Boatright, president of the Arc of Texas, a nonprofit organization that serves people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, said he’s grateful for the support of faith groups that lobby against budget cuts to state health services. But he said he also hopes those groups will continue their support after the cuts set in, because few expect that any area of the state’s budget will go unscathed.

Allmon, of the Texas Catholic Conference, said that faith organizations like the Catholic church are already playing a major role in providing basic needs and services. “Anytime the state makes cuts, the lines in our food pantries double and triple, and it becomes harder and harder for us to provide those without assistance,” Allmon said. “So we believe in the Catholic teaching that there is a role for government. There is a role for the common good and for the government providing for the common good.”

But not everyone sees the looming cuts as a bad thing. Pat Carlson of the Texas Eagle Forum, a conservative, pro-family, pro-life organization, is looking forward to it. “Government does not improve our lives,” said Carlson, one of two volunteer lobbyists for the forum. She said she would support cost-cutting measures such as the idea floated last year of opting out of Medicaid. And if that’s not possible, she said the program ought to be at least trimmed. “You can cut what the benefits are without cutting medical service,” Carlson said. “I’m not saying cut the program completely because there is a need there for some people, but many times those programs have gotten abused.”

Faith group leaders will be a constant presence at the Capitol this year to remind lawmakers that the budget is a moral document, said the Rev. T. Randall Smith of the United Methodist Church and president of the Texas Impact board. “It is very important,” Smith said, “that the Legislature have some voice calling them to accountability for the moral choices, the value choices in terms of the budgetary decisions.”

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://trib.it/gpqPLF.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Pre-K Programs Vulnerable as Schools Confront Cuts

Just how important is full-day pre-kindergarten for the state’s youngest and most disadvantaged kids? Is it more important than after-school tutoring? Than canceling music and art classes? As they brace for a proposed $10 billion less in state funding, that’s one decision that public schools will have to make.

“It’s choosing between bad and worse and bad and bad,” says Daniel King, the superintendent of the Rio Grande Valley’s Pharr-San Juan-Alamo district, “It’s definitely not a good day when we are sitting around talking about whether class size going up could help salvage all-day pre-K, or vice-versa.”

The Texas Education Agency‘s $1.3 billion in discretionary grants, which fund a variety of special initiatives from full-day pre-K to teacher incentives to high school completion efforts, are among the state programs sent to the guillotine in the introductory budget proposals from both the House and the Senate. The former slashes all funding for the grants, while the latter reduces the total amount to $400 million to be spread across all of the agency’s competitive grant programs. The grants currently allow districts to extend the state’s standard half-day pre-K to a full-day program at a cost of about $200 million per biennium. Last year the program funded full-time pre-K for approximately 101,000 children of the more than 190,000 enrolled in state-funded pre-K.

Advocates argue that pre-K, where students learn fundamentals like counting, the alphabet, sharing and taking turns, makes kids less likely to drop out, repeat grades and need remedial classes as they move through the education system. Developing these skills early, says Libby Doggett, who oversees the Pew Center on the States pre-K advocacy efforts, can result in up to $7 return for every dollar the state invests in pre-K programs. (In Texas, a 2006 study from Texas A&M University showed at least a $3.50 yield on every dollar invested.) She says any cuts to funding for pre-K will hurt the state for “years to come” in increased costs for parents who must alter work schedules to take care of their children during the day, schools that must deal with unprepared students and communities that have to tackle higher dropout rates.

“There’s no educational program that has a better basis in research and a better return in investment,” Doggett says. “Smart states will get out ahead, smart legislators will make sure the money is there, because it really will make the rest of the school system better.”

While district officials say they’re largely in wait-and-see mode as they watch what happens in Austin over the next four months, some say that in their districts, early childhood education programs will only be cut as a last resort. “We’re not going to close the door on 4-year-old students,” says Diane Boyett, a spokeswoman for Victoria Independent School District, where 65 percent of children qualify for pre-K. “Pre K will not end in VISD. I think what you’ll see instead is a prioritization of programs.”

The Legislature doesn’t spell out how the reduction in state public education funding will be implemented across the districts. That’s left for when it revamps its school financing formulas. The standard half-day pre-K program, which Texas offers to all children who can’t speak English or are from low-income, foster or military families, remains intact for now — and Senate Education Committee Chairwoman Florence Shapiro, R-Plano, says she doesn’t expect the formula funding for the half-day program to be cut at all in the final budget.

The grants for full-day pre-K are a different matter, says state Rep. Scott Hochberg, D-Houston. “Given that school districts are being expected to cut about $30,000 from each classroom,” says Hochberg, who is the vice chairman of the House Public Education Committee, “it’s pretty hard to argue that we should carve out a certain amount of money for a small group of school districts to do something special when everyone else is being told to cut.”

King’s Pharr-San Juan-Alamo district received about $3 million in discretionary grants for its pre-K program last year. The students there are 99 percent Hispanic, and 86 percent are from economically disadvantaged homes. The majority, he says, enter with limited English skills. “When you’re a district almost entirely comprised of students who really need that extra boost to get started, it is a critical issue,” King says, noting that in other districts where only a small number of students qualify for the program, it may be easier to offset the detrimental effects.

He also worries that if grant funding for full-day pre-K is eliminated this session, it could set back future efforts to pass legislation to permanently fund expanded pre-K for all economically disadvantaged kids through the state’s core school funding formula.

“Because it’s a grant and not all districts get it, it probably makes it more politically feasible to cut. On the other hand, if it is cut, then we go backwards who knows when, if ever it will be able to come back in,” he says, “We go from where there was a push to expand it to become part of the state’s foundation program, to going completely the other way where it moves completely off the agenda.”

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://trib.it/gvwn09.

Enhanced by Zemanta