February 04, 2009
About that "Budget Calculator"

The Governor's office made news recently showing its "budget calculator," in an attempt to let citizens get a hands-on feel for the challenges of addressing the state's looming budget shortfall.

It's a nice idea - though not so oddly lacking mention of the gross overspending of previous years that is contributing mightily to the mess - yet, sadly lacking in relevancy.

Why?

The calculator breaks out budget options into exceptionally vague topic areas. Example: "Student Achievement" is the largest component of the budget, and if you look at the actual page associated with the topic, there is a lot to actually digest.

More importantly, simply playing around with related budget numbers via the calculator for that broad topic area does nothing to match the actual work legislators (and the Governor) have to do in writing the budget. For instance, a more appropriate way to examine the "Student Achievement" budget is to evaluate the Priorities of Government (POG) scorecard on the topic [pdf]. There, you actually get a sense of the comparative value of certain programs as well as the fiscal impact of cutting them. I'll attest from my own participation in a POG process, that's where the real budget decisions can and should take place.

That's the actual process budget writers deal with, not simply playing with numbers in broad, umbrella-style topics.

Moreover, some of the language used for the budget calculator is obtuse. What's the one subject area that received an increase in Gregoire's budget? "Government efficiency." In addition to some attractive looking talking points, reading just a little below the surface of the topic confirms that yes, "Government Efficiency" in the parlance of the Governor's budget means funding the operation of state agencies, and thus state employees. And they're the only topic getting an increase.

Ultimately, that's not so subtle. Just as the calculator isn't actual meaningful in any sort of productive way...other than shocking citizens with the challenges of addressing the problem before a tax increase to fund K-12 education gets punted to the voters.

Posted by Eric Earling at February 04, 2009 06:31 PM | Email This
Comments
1. I plan to start with FY 2007-2009 and match that with the FY 2009-2011 revenue. Looks like they didn't want that comparison made. I'll have to dig that up.

Posted by: mvray on February 4, 2009 07:09 PM
2. I went and played with it, then threw my hands up. How stupid. I even wrote this suggestion which I expect will not even get a 'thanks but no thanks'

Give me a box of Sharpie markers and a dozen volunteer stay-at-home moms who have been fighting to live within their household budgets for the last few years. Give each of these women a copy of the budget, and ask them to mark out anything that looks inefficient, unnecessary, or wasteful. When everyone is done, gather up the budgets and go through them, page by page, side by side. Any item that is marked out in say 10 out of 12 copies, is cut from the budget.

Of course, someone might say "But they're not INFORMED enough to understand why those are VITAL." Doesn't matter. Just do it. If something is so incomprehensible that it needs extra justification, or so obviously wasteful that anybody with a Public School education can see it can't justify itself.....can be cut.

It might be a million little cuts, but those cuts add up.

Posted by: Angela in Bothell on February 4, 2009 07:24 PM
3. I balanced the budget. In fact I could not figure out to lower taxes so I ended up with a 23 billion surplus!

Posted by: Lysander on February 4, 2009 08:02 PM
4. I suspect you are right, Eric. This is a public relations exercise, by an administration that is very good at public relations exercises. It's too bad they haven't been better at budgeting.

Posted by: ram on February 4, 2009 08:20 PM
5. Gregoire is in DC (again) for signing the health care bill...maybe this time Nobama will ask to be the HHS?

I bet if she would have lost to Rossi she would have taken it in a heart beat...

HEALTH: Gregoire in D.C. for children's health bill signing
By Les Blumenthal, Herald Washington, D.C., bureau
Washington, D.C. Gov. Chris Gregoire is in Washington, D.C., today for the signing of a children's health bill by President Obama and to do a little lobbying on Capitol Hill for the stimulus bill.
...
On another matter, she said she wasn't interested in becoming secretary of Health and Human Services now that Tom Daschle has withdrawn his nomination. She said Daschle's action was a setback for health care reform.

"I'm not looking for a job," Gregoire said. "I've got tough times and need to stay where I am."

Posted by: Glenno on February 4, 2009 09:14 PM
6. 2--here here! right on the nose.

jimmie's budget plan just like yours--line by line veto/overhaul

1--cut all aid and bene's to illegal aliens immediately; no citizen = no nuttin'
2--freeze spending statewide (for now) except for urgent emergency areas like police & fire; then, sunset programs after performance audits
3--tie legislators' pay and benefits (especially pensions) to objective econ. performance like private businesses do; you screw up, you lose; you create business & jobs in your district, you get a good pay bonus;
4--mandate all legislators work like summer interns in a small business for 6 mos and tie 100% of their pay to success measures; fail and you get squat or little else; learn what business feels directly in the trenches; most of these characters have never signed a payroll or fired a good worker due to budgets; clueless;
4A--mandate all legislators work on a WA farm for 2 weeks (like Guard reservists) to mix with real people "who cling to guns and religion"; tossing hay bales & cleaning stalls focuses the mind;
5--performance audits mandatory for all state functions--NOW
6--reduce state tax rates (sales tax & B&O)for a 5 year holiday period; slash them & watch if it works to generate more business than our neighboring states; reinstate them if not; make localities live within budgets like we do at home; no bailouts; no nanny states; make our state business-friendly & see if they really come AND STAY...take the businesses fed-up & ready to move & convince them to stay here in WA using retired businesspeople and consultants hired to preserve our state & offer tax incentives that are meaningful and long-term for small business planning; money well spent if it works;

if all this does not work, then listen respectfully to alternative plans & move on...

Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on February 4, 2009 09:15 PM
7. Gregoire is in DC (again) for signing the health care bill...maybe this time Nobama will ask her to be the HHS? (The timing is sure odd for "a little lobbying")


Part of the story...
HEALTH: Gregoire in D.C. for children's health bill signing
By Les Blumenthal, Herald Washington, D.C., bureau
Washington, D.C. Gov. Chris Gregoire is in Washington, D.C., today for the signing of a children's health bill by President Obama and to do a little lobbying on Capitol Hill for the stimulus bill.
...
On another matter, she said she wasn't interested in becoming secretary of Health and Human Services now that Tom Daschle has withdrawn his nomination. She said Daschle's action was a setback for health care reform.

"I'm not looking for a job," Gregoire said. "I've got tough times and need to stay where I am."


I bet if she would have lost to Rossi she would have taken it in a heart beat...

Posted by: Glenno on February 4, 2009 09:19 PM
8. Wow, that is really easy... Simply choose the lower of the two budget numbers, and then zero out higher education (colleges are outside the scope of the Washington Constitution). You end up with a $6 billion savings. And you didn't cut anything beyond what Gregoire already wanted, save subsidizing college educations (which I am opposed to).

Posted by: Shanghai Dan on February 5, 2009 07:22 AM
9. I wonder what KLOWN dreamed this up.
The answer is thousands of cuts....but primarily lay-offs, pay reductions, benefit reductions.
Need to start with Gregoire's very own BLOATED Governor's Office Budget.

This is a joke...manipulated to not allow micro-analysis of the Budget.
This is part of the set-up for the huge tax increase you can expect on the ballot in May.

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on February 5, 2009 07:30 AM
10. I ended up with an $18.5 billion surplus.

My biggest cuts were in Governmental Efficiency.

We're spending that much on the Liquor Control Board?!

Posted by: Douglas Aldrich on February 5, 2009 11:03 AM
11. It was missing the following:

A cut in state employee wages

Can the retirement plan for state workers - 401K's are now all there is in the private sector, wake up folks

Where is that Hiring freeze that we have been hearing hearing about for a year, when 10 $ 100k jobs come across the listserver every day?

DUH! 500,000 jobs cut in January, and the State of washington is on a hiring binge -

Socialism!

Posted by: GS on February 6, 2009 12:07 AM
12. Oh and I got a congratulations by balancing the damn budget with a 7 Billion surplus.

Yeh right with this gang of thieves in place?

Posted by: GS on February 6, 2009 12:15 AM
13. How long till some clever sort at the Evergreen Foundation or elsewhere launches a REAL budget simulator?

Posted by: GC on February 6, 2009 12:56 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?