Democrat Bill White criticized Republican Gov. Rick Perry on Tuesday for pressing state agencies to cut their spending by 5 percent, calling the approach "Soviet-style" budget management.
With Texas facing a budget shortfall of at least $11 billion, White also refused to rule out future tax increases to close the gap.
"Until you look under the hood and see what you can do, and what the state of the economy is and what the trade off is, you shouldn't be making that decision (on taxes)," White said at a conference hosted by the Texas Tribune online news site.
The second paragraph -- White refusing to rule out future tax increases -- was (predictably) pounced on by Team Perry, whose rampant cynicism about state government created the budget shortfall in the first place. Rather than accept responsibility, Perry's team attacked "liberal Bill" for raising taxes and blah blah blah even a freshman poli sci student knows the rest.
Rick Perry's fiscally irresponsible budget practices are the reason our state is facing an $11 billion budget shortfall. As Jason Embry of the Austin American-Statesman wrote in a column, "Budget mess got going with 2006 property tax cuts"
The economic downturn isn't helping the shortfall, but it's not driving it, either. The driving factor is a decision by Gov. Rick Perry and the Legislature in 2006 to reduce property taxes by $14 billion every two years and raise only about $9 billion to replace that money. In other words, the Legislature committed $5 billion every two years to holding down property taxes instead of spending that money on education, public safety or other priorities.
Embry's column -- and a similar one written by Bob Garrett of the Dallas Morning News titled, "Agency budget cuts small in face of Texas' gaping shortfall" -- points directly and clearly to both the problem and the cause of the problem. Unfortunately, direct accountability in journalism is rare, and not the rule. The following is an (incomplete) list of stories put out by the Texas press corps regarding yesterday's meeting of the House Appropriations Committee and the news that the state is facing, at minimum, an $11 billion budget shortfall.
None of the stories below mention the very basic fact that the policies set forth by Rick Perry and Texas Republicans led directly to the budget shortfall:
The Associated Press story -- which was only a paragraphs long and was reprinted in many papers -- also did not point fingers at Perry
I'm encouraged by today's story by Jay Root, as well as a blog post put up this afternoon by Jason Embry, that give Bill White the opportunity to point out the facts: Rick Perry caused the budget deficit we are in. However, as soon as White is quoted, the press -- for balance -- goes to Rick Perry (or his spokesperson, Mark Miner) for a quote. And then Bill White's factual statement (that Perry caused the $11 billion budget shortfall) is lined up against Rick Perry's spin (Bill White is a liberal OMG aren't you scared!), and the two are given equal weight.
If that's what has to happen for campaign coverage, fine. But it will forever confuse me that reporters, when writing about a story as critical to Texas as the budget, simply refuse to write about WHY we have that budget shortfall. A column by Jason Embry, Bob Garrett, and others from time-to-time is fine, but the day-to-day journalism must do more to explain to Texans about why the state is suffering the way it is.
Because when they don't, the story reads like a failure of government, as opposed to a failure by the people in charge of government. The distinction may be small -- and I'm sure many reporters will challenge such a distinction -- but it's true. Especially here in Texas, where every single official is appointed by Rick Perry. As we go forward, reporters should -- in my humble opinion -- do a better job at pointing out who caused the various shortfalls at our state agencies and state government.
Today, State Representative Jim Dunnam, who is Chair of the House Select Committee on Federal Economic Stabilization Funding, penned a Statesman in the op-ed knocking Dewhurst and Perry for their blatant hypocrisy. From his op-ed, titled, "Texas a fiscal wonderland? Now that's pure fantasy"
The problem with much of the current Republican Party leadership is not that they disagree with Democrats. The real problem is that they disagree with reality.
By shamelessly pretending that in is out and up is down, they have spun themselves into Wonderland.
Whether you like the stimulus or not, this misinformation is getting out of hand.
You should really read the entire op-ed -- Chairman Dunnam does a great job detailing all of Perry's hypocrisy.
Texas Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst wrote an op-ed in today's Austin American-Statesman where he attempts to spin a lie that Texas didn't need stimulus dollars to balance the budget.
Given recent comments about our state's budget, I feel it is time to separate fact from political fiction. The fact is, in stark contrast to the U. S. Congress, the Texas Constitution requires the Legislature to balance the state budget every two years, and that would have happened with or without any federal stimulus dollars.
In 2007, I led the effort to save $7 billion to balance the revenue shortfall we anticipated this year.
So it's simply political fiction that stimulus dollars were necessary to balance our budget.
OK then Dewhurst -- how would you have balanced the budget without using the $14 billion in federal stimulus dollars?
To balance the budget, he's either got to cut spending or raid the Rainy Day Fund -- but the Rainy Day Fund wouldn't have filled a $14 billion budget hole. So what would Dewhurst have cut?
Kicked more kids off of CHIP?
Further gutted public education spending?
Dewhurst has no answer to this at all.
Meanwhile -- while Dewhurst is out spinning lies to cover his and every other Texas Republican's political hide when Rick Perry is rallying against Washington at the same time he's accepting $14 billion to fill a budget hole that he created -- his Senate Finance Chair, Steve Ogden, is actually telling the truth.
"In order to balance the budget this biennium, which is $182 billion, we used $14 billion in federal stimulus money to balance it," said Sen. Steve Ogdenm R-Bryan. "We're not expecting a similar amount of similar money to be available in the next two years because the federal government just doesn't have it. So, assuming that's true, you go into the next session with a $14 billion hole."
According to the State Comptroller's office, Texas requested and was allocated almost $20 billion in federal stimulus funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment ACt, and has so far been awarded about $13 billion. About $3.6 billion has been received, and nearly all of the received funds have been spent.
If David Dewhurst really wants to claim that Texas didn't need the stimulus funds, then he should produce a budget that shows what he would have cut. But he'll never do that, because this isn't about leadership or fiscal responsibility or being honest about how Texas Republicans play a shall game with Texas' taxpayer dollars.
It's about political power, and political wars -- and Dewhurst, Perry, Strauss, and every other Texas Republican is going to rally against Big Bad Washington while silently singing President Obama and the Democratic Congress' praises that they bailed Texas out of a massive $14 billion budget hole.
Don't believe Dewhurst' spin -- and don't believe it when you hear it repeated for the next year in the press, in local elections, in campaign forums, or on the campaign trail. The Republican-led legislature was only able to balance the budget because of federal stimulus dollars.
Remember -- I didn't say it. The Republican Senate Finance Chair did.
While Senators John Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchison, complain about the Obama administration and Democratic controlled Congress spending on the stimulus, the budget and potentially on health care reform their votes in favor of building seven more F-22 fighters for $1.75 billion are hypocritical in the extreme. Republicans including Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, Senators John McCain and John Kyl among others agreed that the F-22 was unnecessary and an inappropriate expenditure. Fortunately the vote to kill the F-22 was truly bi-partisan with 42 Democrats, 15 Republicans and 1 independent; unlike some other legislation lately which had only token Republican support.
Our senators claim to make their votes based on what's good for Texas and the country but how is building a cold war era fighter that can't be flown near an aircraft carrier and hasn't been used in combat over Baghdad because its super-sensitive electronics can't deal with the mass of radio signals good for the country?
I've heard some Republicans say they voted for the F-22 to save jobs; but their party generally claims, quite loudly, that government spending doesn't create jobs, so which is it? There are plenty of worthwhile projects that $1,750,000,000 could fund including bridge repairs, building schools, green energy and energy efficiency projects that would pay dividends for all of us for years to come.
(John is doing great work to help organize Democratic activists for the two State Board of Education elections in Travis County in November 2010. Get involved early and help make a difference! - promoted by Katherine Haenschen)
State Board of Education Forums at Yarborough For Saturday May 2, 11:45-1:15 pm
"Why You Should Care about the State Board of Education"
Julie Cowan is the proud mother of three Anderson high school students. She has served as PTA president at Anderson High School (currently), Murchison Middle School, and Doss Elementary School. She has served AISD in numerous capacities, most recently participating on the 2008 Citizens' Bond Advisory Committee, 2007 Middle School Strategic Planning Task Force, and 2007 and 2008 Budget Committees. In addition to supporting public education, Julie served the Travis County Medical Alliance as president. A graduate of Southern Methodist University, Julie has a BA in Political Science, a BFA in Public Relations, and a Texas Teaching Certificate. Julie is married to Dr. Rob Cowan, a board certified OB/Gyn.
Alana Morris works in K-12 public education in suburban Houston. Her over twenty years of public school experience in Texas, includes work both as a classroom teacher and as a district-literacy specialist. She is author of Vocabulary Unplugged, and past president of both the Texas Council of Teachers of English Language and the Coalition of Reading and English Supervisors of Texas. Alana was appointed by the SBOE as a work-group specialist for the most recent revisions of TEKS for English Language Arts and Reading. This service led her to testify before the SBOE, and got her fired up enough to testify before both education committees of the Texas legislature. Because of their leadership, Alana and two colleagues were given an Intellectual Freedom award from the National Council of Teachers of English.
Dr. Ronald Wetherington is professor of anthropology, and director of the Center for Teaching Excellence at Southern Methodist University. He received a B.A. in zoology from Texas Tech and an M.A. and Ph.D. in anthropology from the University of Michigan. In the Spring of 2009 he served as one of six special science advisors to our State Board of Education. The Texas Freedom Network gave its 2009 Grassroots Hero Award to Dr. Wetherington, saying that he is :a "dedicated individual who exemplifies Texas Freedom Network's work to Stand Up for Science", and adding that "whether working behind the scenes to patiently educate board members or in front of the cameras making a vocal case for science standards free from creationist ideology, Dr. Wetherington has worked tirelessly to ensure Texas students have a rigorous science curriculum that will prepare them for the 21st century."
Forums are at Yarborough Public Library, 2200 Hancock Dr., Austin, TX 78756, on the first Saturdays of each month from February-November, 2009, except for July and September when the library is closed for holidays. Forums are always from 11:45am - 1:15pm. All forums are free, and open to the public.
Coming in August: Laura Ewing(D) from Galveston county, and Patricia Hardy(R) from Tarrant county on "What You Should Know Before You Run for the State Board of Education". Each has run for the SBOE, where Ms. Hardy represents SBOE-11.
For more information, contact John Keohane keohane@prodigy.net (512) 371-3853
(Bill Spelman is endorsed by BOR. - promoted by Karl-Thomas Musselman)
We're in a recession, and unemployment is still rising. Should Austin offer tax incentives to bring in new businesses? If sales tax revenue doesn't turn around, should we cut public safety, parks and libraries, or something else? Shouldn't you be involved in making these decisions?
I believe the weak economy and the tight budget are the most pressing issues facing Austin today. Please join us next Tuesday evening for a town hall meeting to discuss them.
COMMUNITY TOWN HALL "Budget & Economy"
Tuesday, April 14
6:00 - 8:00 p.m.
First Unitarian Universalist Church
4700 Grover Ave
Austin, TX 78756
RSVP on Facebook
You're invited to share your ideas and be a part of the solution. Austin faces some tough challenges ahead, but by working together, we can leverage our city resources to get the most bang for our taxpayer buck. If you can't make the event, then please share your ideas online.
Thanks for your support. I look forward to meeting with you personally to hear how you think we can best improve Austin.
Dear Senator Cornyn,
I received an email from you Wednesday April 2 about your op-ed in the Austin American-Statesman and having read it was motivated to respond to a number of logical errors, economic fallacies and disingenuous statements. I will respond to each of your paragraphs with my in own immediately following.
You:
This week, I will vote against the massive $3.6 trillion budget proposed by President Barrack Obama and Democrats in Congress, and Texans deserve to understand why. I believe this budget taxes too much, spends too much and borrows too much. This budget will delay economic recovery in Texas and across the nation, and it will reduce opportunities for all of us.
Your Constituent:
So by that logic you should have voted against President Bush's budgets as well since he spent too much and borrowed too much, but wait the difference was he taxed less. Of course that means we have to tax more now but now it's the Democrats who can be blamed as the party of "tax and spend" even if Republicans are the party of "borrow and spend". How exactly does putting people to work and lengthening the term of unemployment benefits as well as broadening the rules for who is eligible for benefits delay the economic recovery of Texas and the country?
It may well be that one of the most important laws that gets made this session isn't even a law.
It didn't get a hearing. It was never evaluated for its fiscal impact. No one, for it or against it, ever got to testify on it or really even knew it was happening.
A whole lot of people, including me, are deeply opposed to it. But depending on what happens today, it might not be possible to stop it without forcing a special session this summer, even if that's possible.
I'm talking about the ban on embryonic stem cell research that's now hidden away in the 2010-11 state budget.
If you missed it - and, unless you happened to be watching the right two minutes of the Senate Finance Committee meeting last Monday, you did - the committee voted 6-5 (with four members absent) to write into the budget what's known as a rider. This obscure provision says, "No funds appropriated under this Act shall be used in conjunction with or to support research which involves the destruction of a human embryo" (emphasis added). Here's some coverage of the decision, along with my statement from last week.
I've heard it said that a "strict" reading indicates that under this provision, public universities (where much of this work is taking place) would be prohibited from such basic things as paying the salaries of some researchers or the electricity bills for buildings where this research is taking place. I'd call that a "common sense, real life" reading of English - I can't see how you could argue anything else without ignoring the six words I highlighted.
The most remarkable thing, however, isn't the action; it's the way it happened. There was no notice that this rider was up for a vote, the committee didn't discuss it at all, and no one was given the opportunity to testify on it.
This for a provision that could dictate whether Texas will lead in the biomedical industries that rise from this research, attract researchers who will power the 21st Century economy, and play a role in developing cures to horrible diseases and afflictions.
And people wonder why I worry about budget openness and transparency . . .
Why this matters
There probably isn't much doubt about how important this is to me. I naturally support any ethical, humane form of research into cures for the cancer that killed both of my parents and dramatically impacted me, or the Type 1 diabetes that keeps my oldest son on what amounts to a life-support system (albeit one that gives him a healthy, productive, active life).
Embryonic stem cell research has the potential to treat, prevent and cure these and other diseases. Scientists can work with these cells to study how organs develop and become damaged. And they might find cures that will lead the body to re-create healthy cells and organs in the place of sickened ones.
To get the basics on stem cell research from folks who do it for a living, click here.
Even former President George W. Bush recognized the importance of this research when he set out rules allowing scientists to use existing lines of stem cells - theoretically allowing the work to continue while preventing new stem cell lines from being formed from fertilized embryos (which are most commonly found in the freezers of fertility clinics, where they're stored until they're discarded).
Of course, President Obama has reversed the limitations created by those rules, creating a huge opportunity for scientists around the country to expand research into these areas - developing cures and companies that will boost the economy and help the infirm.
Some states are already moving to invest in this vital new area. But in Texas, apparently, some leaders want to go the other direction.
The stem cell rider would ban even the types of ongoing research that the Bush rules allowed. It's an attack on the folks working to help us, either by providing jobs that will get us out of this recession and allow Texas to remain competitive and prosperous in the 21st Century economy, or by finding cures that will save people in this state and around the world.
I wish that were the worst thing about the rider.
Everything that's wrong about the budget
The truth is, there are two sides to this debate. I understand the concerns of people who look at it differently than I do, and I respect them for their passion.
They have a perspective, and this is a democracy. If we were to debate this issue the way we do everything else, they'd make their case, we'd make ours, the legislature would decide it, and the voters would decide whom to reward and to punish.
But that's not how this is happening.
No, this is being shoved into the one bill that the legislature has to pass every two years - the budget. And, again, it was done with no notice, no testimony, and no debate. All we know is that the members have "been discussing this privately," according to the committee chairman. It isn't even clear that the members completely understood the implications of the rider.
To hear the entire public discussion of whether or not to ban this research at Texas institutions, go to the Senate broadcast archives, click on Part II of the March 23rd Senate Finance Committee meeting, and fast-forward to the 41:28 mark. It's over by 43:30, and the speed and lack of consideration are stunning.
I've been talking all year about how the budget process is rigged, set up to avoid scrutiny and to enforce the will of the powerful. Accounting is creative and self-serving. Funds aren't used in ways leaders promise and people demand. Legislators grade their own papers. And transparency tools lag behind technology in allowing people to know how their money is being spent.
Well, this is the ultimate demonstration of it. A very important, very controversial issue that likely wouldn't survive the legislative process slips into the budget in the darkest of ways.
People who feel as I do about embryonic stem cell research now have three hopes: that the Senate Finance Committee will reevaluate this mistake - either in substance or process - and remove the rider before voting the whole budget out of committee as early as today; that this provision will vanish as mysteriously as it appeared at some point during the budget process; or that the budget will somehow not pass and we'll all come back this summer for a "special" session.
But no matter how you feel about this issue, the events of this week should trouble you. One partisan majority should never use something like the state budget as a cloak to hide the passage of partisan legislation.
It corrupts the system.
Power shifts, and majorities come and go. But one truth should remain: It's wrong to pass the most important laws in ways that people are the least likely to see.
Although U.S. Reps. Gene Green, Sheila Jackson Lee, Charlie Gonzales, Al Green, Ciro Rodriguez and Henry Cuellar, all Democrats from Texas, stressed that they "support President Obama's goals to end our addiction to foreign oil, invest in clean, renewable energy and transition to a low-carbon economy," the five congressman warned that the President's proposals could curb domestic energy production.
The group, who were joined by six other House Democratic colleagues, sent a letter yesterday to U.S. Rep. John Spratt, chairman of the House Budget Committee. The committee is expected to begin considering President Obama's budget today.
Obama’s budget would bar deductions for intangible drilling costs, block oil and natural gas companies from claiming domestic manufacturing deductions and repeal the percentage depletion for wells. It also would impose new use-it-or-lose-it style fees on inactive drilling leases on public lands.
Administration officials have argued that the incentives encourage reliance on polluting fossil fuels while draining federal coffers.
... they told Spratt [that] the U.S. needs an all-inclusive energy policy that recognizes the role of natural gas and oil. And they are concerned that some of the proposed tax increases could hurt “domestic energy production and job growth,” while disproportionately affecting small and independent producers.
Do you think these six congressman are right or should they have stood with President Obama on his energy proposals?
(We are lucky to have elected officials like Rep. Coleman. - promoted by Matt Glazer)
"Now, in 2003, I guess you could say a 20 foot hole was dug and the needs of the State of Texas were reduced by that 20 foot hole, the money that pays for those needs. Since then, there's been a little bit put back, and a little bit more put back there, and a little bit more put back there and now the hole is only 10 feet deep [. . .] I don't believe that it is the measurement of what's good for the State of Texas to still have us in a hole in the ground."
- Rep. Garnet Coleman on HB 1, the state budget for 2008-09
You'll find the full text of my remarks below the jump. Be sure to check my website for more updates on state government in Texas.
