Quantcast
MobileRJ | RSS TwitterTwitter FacebookFacebook E-mail Alerts
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat

Opinion
May. 14, 2009
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

EDITORIAL: Cuts? What cuts?

Despite squawking, state budget will continue to grow

With its Tuesday night agreement on higher education spending, the Legislature has finalized the framework of the 2009-11 general fund -- and there's no way anyone can use the word "cut" to describe it.

Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford, D-Las Vegas, said months of hearings on funding priorities for public schools, the state justice system, welfare programs, colleges and universities and public employee salaries and benefits have resulted in approved spending "just south of $7 billion."

Most Popular Stories
  • VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: What stops mass murderers? A gun
  • SHERMAN FREDERICK: Call evil by its rightful name
  • EDITORIAL: Terrorism on trial
  • EDITORIAL: A pre-9/11 approach to terror
  • LETTERS: Public-sector workers are still doing well
  • LETTERS: Harry Reid: Working hard for all Americans
  • EDITORIAL: 'That's the ticket!'
  • Our politicians are the greatest, all right
  • EDITORIAL: I believe in free speech, but ...
  • LETTERS: A giant octopus threatens rural Nevada




    • You'd think that figure represented fiscal Armageddon, given the propensity of progressives to toss around phrases such as "Draconian cuts," "falling behind" and "Third World status." Anyone who claims as much now is enabling the biggest lie of the legislative session.

    We'll say it again: There will be no cuts in the 2009-11 budget -- only more spending increases.

    It's so simple even a liberal blogger can understand it.

    The Legislature passed a $5.9 billion, two-year budget in 2005. Lawmakers passed a $6.8 billion budget in 2007, but revenue shortfalls caused by the recession forced lawmakers to modify those spending increases. When the current biennium ends June 30, the state will have spent between $6.2 billion and $6.3 billion on general fund programs, about 7 percent more than the budget before.

    If Sen. Horsford's math is correct, and the Legislature ends up passing a $6.9 billion budget for 2009-11, state spending will increase 10 percent over current levels. That's right: State government will grow by double digits under the new budget when compared with the current, modified one -- the one that's 7 percent bigger than the one before.

    But those facts won't get in the way of the nonsense that continues to come out of Carson City. You'll still hear and read the word "cut" a few hundred times before lawmakers adjourn in early June.

    Those "cuts" will represent imaginary reductions from one of two bogus figures: the huge funding increases authorized in the 2007 budget that were never met because of the revenue shortfalls, and the pie-in-the-sky, what-we-wish-we-could-spend amounts most agencies requested for 2009-11 but knew they had no chance of getting.

    Thus, anyone who claims the general fund should be about $8 billion to "maintain current services" (whatever that means) can say the budget reflects across-the-board cuts of 12 to 13 percent. Still a bit foggy on the math? Imagine a 10-year-old asking for a 50 percent increase in his allowance, but upon getting only a 10 percent boost, crying that his pay had been cut 40 percent.

    But budgeting $6.9 billion for the general fund and coming up with the money are two different things. The Economic Forum, the nonpartisan panel that provides binding revenue forecasts to the Legislature, says the state's current tax structure will generate $5.5 billion over the next two years.

    That means Sen. Horsford and his colleagues must come up with nearly $1.5 billion in tax increases and federal "stimulus" funding to balance the budget. The figure would make the record tax hikes of 2003, which totaled more than $830 million, seem like an inflationary adjustment.

    If the public can be tricked into thinking that state government is being drastically cut back, even with a 10-figure tax hike, they'll be more likely to support the, ahem, "revenue enhancements."

    But if they're made wise to the fact that state government will continue growing at a healthy clip when household budgets, businesses and the economy as a whole are contracting -- if they feel like they're being tricked -- they might say no.

    Which is exactly why you'll hear about nothing but "cuts, cuts, cuts."

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 44 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    Barb wrote on May 15, 2009 02:13 PM: Gee Las Vegas Review Journal.....I really like reading you!

    You are a real newspaper and loved the "Cuts? What Cuts?" Editorial of 5/14/09.

    I live in northern Nevada and am totally disgusted with "only happy talk and toursim' pap we get up here at the RGJ in Reno.

    I will continue to read your paper for real news in the state of Nevada.

    Thanks for being real journalists!

    Barb
    SaveRNVanimals.org
    Carson City Nevada


    Rob L. wrote on May 15, 2009 07:15 AM: Rea or Lea or whatever names youre using today...

    You say I have comprehesion problems yet you cant figure out where in the words "he does not believe it is necessary or fair to hardworking seniors to raise the retirement age" that he doesnt plan on raising the retirement age??? Another wizard with far more insults than intellect.


    Interesting Math wrote on May 14, 2009 07:18 PM: They must be using Obamaroid fuzzy math to call them cuts.


    Joe Bama wrote on May 14, 2009 04:59 PM: I hope the cute blond that works on the grounds maintenance crew at UNLV doesn't get laid off.


    VOTE THE BASTARDS OUT! wrote on May 14, 2009 04:51 PM: The only thing we the little people can do is to vote out these democratic bastards that only want to tax and spend.


    Rea Lau wrote on May 14, 2009 04:47 PM: For Rob L;

    Work on your reading comprehension skills!

    "According to his campaign website, “Obama will protect Social Security benefits for current and future beneficiaries alike. And he does not believe it is necessary or fair to hardworking seniors to raise the retirement age.""

    Where do you read in that quote, which is not from his website as you insist, that he will NOT change retirement age (and actually, that's a Congress thing), for "young-ens?

    Dandin; you do know the difficulty Alaska's budget is in right now, don't you? Why don't we stick the dump in, say Elko? Or, Carson City? Or, Minden or Gardenerville? Please read about the Great Depression and the issue of a frozen credit market...then come on back and talk.

    John F....right on! We know that Patrick and the NPRI crew is the Faux News of misrepresentation of facts! Yesterday, NPRI's Patrick got busted for claiming that CA had lost 1.5 million in population over the last decade when he date shows that the population GROWTH of CA during the last 9 years was more than the total population on Nevada!

    Then NPRI wrote that ILL, MA, MI, OH, CT all lost population over past decade when in fact, the US Census data shows each and everyone of those states had a population gain. NPRI..fibs.


    Get Real wrote on May 14, 2009 04:18 PM: I can't stand this!

    We always think higher taxes is the way to go. Has anyone ever REALLY thought about how much taxes YOU PAY?

    How much of your income in percentage do you pay? Most people think 16%, what they pay in income taxes. What about annual sales taxes you pay, auto, property, fees on utilities, traffic tickets. Reality is that we all pay about 40% of our income to taxes.

    Where will it end?? Bottom line is government is TOO BIG, TOO INEFFECTIVE, TOO OVERPAID, TOO MUCH!

    You wonder why your buying power is down, this is why, not your employer


    Dandin wrote on May 14, 2009 03:51 PM: In Nevada, Tobacco and Alcohol taxes are among the lowest in the nation, Business taxes are among the lowest in the nation,Gaming taxes are among the lowest in the nation, Mining taxes are among the lowest in the nation,and mining just grew their holdings in Nevada and for them it was a very sweet deal. BUT TAXES are not the only solution!

    Despite the fears of the uneducated, Nevada could bring in BILLIONs MORE DOLLARS annually if they would finish the Yucca nuclear storage site, charge for shipping to the site, require the feds to build a modern nuclear waste materials recycling plant on site, recycle the waste, require the feds to build a modern nuclear power plant on site to use the recycled nuclear waste, charge for the power produced, and then charge for storing the re-used recycled waste which now has a shorter life and is easier to store. All technologically feasible. And worth more money than Alaska makes with its oil! Usually Alaska even provides each long-term resident almost 2000 dollar dividends each year from the oil profits. And Nevada could grow the other energy sectors such as WIND, SOLAR, and GEOTHERMAL.

    AND IF THE FEDs had NOT given the BAILOUT funds to Banks and Corporations, but instead gave it to every employed US citizen, which would be between 10,000 and 20,000 per person, THAT WOULD REALLY HAVE STIMULATED THE ECONOMY! AND definitely delayed foreclosures and the economic crash, till more intelligent ideas could prevail.


    I am crying wrote on May 14, 2009 03:20 PM: Senator Horsford is my Senator for my District. I am crying because all he does is raise my taxes and I voted for him. He needs to take care of the brothas.


    Rob L. wrote on May 14, 2009 01:06 PM: John,

    Then you need to be angrily asking the guy you elected why the budget grew yet there were cuts at UNLV. Ask him to explain where the money was spent. Or you could wander over to http://www.budget.state.nv.us/ and get sick reading it for yourself instead of cursing the messenger once again.

    Your "leaders" caused this mess, not the newspaper.


    Read All Comments