Washington State House of Representatives / State Rep. Jim Moeller, D-Vancouver (49th Legislative District)
Friday afternoon, June 17, 2011
ISSUE
Wednesday, June 15, 2011: Gov. Chris Gregoire signed the 2011-2013 biennial budget, as well as the 2011 supplemental operating budget. (She vetoed a number of sections in the main new budget.) Click budget for specific information.
Thursday, June 16, 2011: The Economic and Revenue Forecast Council adopted a new General Fund-State revenue forecast.
State Rep. Jim Moeller says this about the current state of budget and revenue affairs:
STATEMENT
“Changes were incorporated into our budget assumptions earlier this year when we
passed first the 2011 supplemental budget and then later the 2011-2013 biennial budget. Anticipating the possibility of a continuing slump in revenue collections, in fact, we left a relatively large ending-fund balance in the new budget.
“This latest revenue forecast is obviously not good news for our state, but it is not unexpected. It should also be noted that this is a forecast, a prediction – not a fact. This forecast is a prediction of an ending-fund balance at the end of two years if nothing is done next January. The budget just signed by the governor is not what anyone with any sort of functioning moral compass would suggest is a ‘good’ budget. It does reflect the difficult decisions we made in difficult times.
“We struggled in this budget to find every way possible to avoid turning our backs on our neighbors in need. The budget reflects a compromise of ideas and priorities. Even the governor couldn’t live with some parts of the budget, and so she vetoed them out of the budget – which decreased the ending-fund balance.
“Some observers maintain that we don’t have a budget problem because we expect to receive $4 billion more in revenue in the 2011-2013 biennium than we collected in the 2009-2011 budget period. They use that number to back up their assertion that our state has not a budget problem but a spending problem.
“But just remember what so often happens when folks use a lazy argument in their attempt to win a debate. They conjure up some numbers that tell half the story – if that much – and call it good. Then they tie a nice rhetorical bow on their little contrivance – and promptly march off to sell it, real ‘cheap,’ to anyone they can hoodwink into swallowing their cynical pitch.”